YouTube – Donna Campbell – I want to Be Heard
via YouTube – Donna Campbell – I want to Be Heard.
http://www.youtube.com/v/VJtAId1pWUk&feature=player_embedded
YouTube – Donna Campbell – I want to Be Heard
via YouTube – Donna Campbell – I want to Be Heard.
http://www.youtube.com/v/VJtAId1pWUk&feature=player_embedded
PolitiFact Texas | Donna Campbell says that Rep. Lloyd Doggett voted for health care, cap-and-trade, and stimulus legislation
Even the Austin American agrees with Dr. Donna Campbell’s ad about Lloyd Doggett’s voting record click on the above link to check out what PolitiFact has to say!
Despite President Obama’s prediction that it would create new jobs, the climate change bill passed by the House will mean fewer jobs by 2030 than if Congress did nothing at all, according to the first comprehensive study of the measure by the federal government.
The report by the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration said the bill would lead to small increases in electricity costs for consumers — what Democrats said was an affordable sacrifice for the environmental benefits of lowering greenhouse gas emissions.
“We can move to a clean energy future at a cost of less than a postage stamp per family per day,” Energy Secretary Steven Chu said.
The report said the average cost to a household by 2020 would be $114, though those costs would more than double to $288 by 2030 as the rules on polluters tighten.
The Democrat-controlled House narrowly passed its climate change bill on a 219-212 vote June 26. A week later, Mr. Obama told chief executives that the legislation “holds the promise of millions of new jobs — jobs, by the way, that can’t be outsourced.”
Mr. Chu repeated the assertion Tuesday.
But a chart in the EIA report showed the employment rate — just like the economy as a whole — worsening for the first several years, improving slightly in the midterm, peaking in 2024 and then declining steadily. It showed 0.25 percent fewer jobs in 2030 under the Democrats’ bill, with the manufacturing sector suffering a 2.5 percent lag.
For the economy as a whole, immediate energy price spikes would be followed by relative calm as the economy adjusted. But when stricter rules go into effect in 2025 “the rapid increase in energy prices causes the economy to contract,” EIA said.
The House bill imposes a limit on overall U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and tightens that cap over time, requiring polluters to either reduce their emissions or offset their pollutants by paying others to reduce their emissions. The system is known as “cap-and-trade.”
The Senate is still drafting its version of the climate bill.
via Government study: Climate bill spells gloom for jobs – Washington Times.
Cap and Trade: Greenhouse Gas Regulations and the Impact on Texas.
Global warming has a price. So does turning down the world’s thermostat. The question is, who pays for reducing greenhouse gases? And is the burden shared — or shifted unfairly?
U.S. Congress is acting now on regulatory legislation that would enlarge the federal budget, eliminate jobs and increase food and energy prices. This cap and trade proposal also would create a commodities market for Wall Street to help companies buy and sell pollution rights.
The legislation would penalize Texas because it is the nation’s energy capital and a manufacturing center.
Texas could lose 135,000 to 277,000 jobs in 2012, the first year of the proposed cap-and-trade regulation. The average Texas household could pay up to an extra $1,136 on household goods and services over a year with a total potential cost to Texas families of 6.9 billion.
Is this the best approach? How can we fully mitigate the impact? Will Congress have the money to stimulate a green economy to replace lost jobs?
Breaking Down Government Motors – HUMAN EVENTS.
<!–
Print This | |
Forward | |
Feedback | |
Digg This! | |
Subscribe | |
Sponsored By: | |
–>
Thankfully, freedom still has a voice in Congress. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) introduced legislation that would require Congressional approval before the government takes ownership of a private enterprise. This bill would allow Congress to stop the current shift away from free-market principles.
Johanns is not the only free-marketer. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) has introduced legislation to require the federal government to distribute its ownership shares in General Motors and Chrysler to taxpayers when those companies emerge from bankruptcy proceedings. Alexander argues, “instead of the Treasury owning 60 percent of shares in the new GM and 8 percent of Chrysler, you would own them, if you were one of about 120 million individuals who paid taxes on April 15. This is the fastest way to get the stock out of the hands of Washington and back into the hands of the American people in the marketplace where it belongs.”
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) also joined the fray last weekend, introducing legislation that would restore private ownership to companies that have been effectively nationalized. The Thune proposal would make July 1, 2010 a new day of independence. By that date, the government would have to sell any ownership stake acquired over the past year-and-a-half. There’s no better way to fight the ever-expanding power of the federal government’s ownership in private enterprises than to legislate it out of existence.
Speaking of debt, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told the House Budget Committee earlier this month “we cannot allow ourselves to be in a situation where the debt continues to rise.” Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) responded, “Bernanke helped open up the floodgates of government spending for the last year. Did he finally have an epiphany this morning before the House Budget Committee or is he just trying to cover-up his mistakes? America is looking at mounting debt because of Chairman Bernanke’s support of policies that will put the American taxpayer an estimated $2.8 trillion more in the red.” The recent explosion of government spending and expansion of the money supply by the Fed are poor decisions by the Obama administration that will further lead America down the pothole-filled road to socialism.
The Supreme Court of Health Care
The recently released health reform legislation drafted by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) contains numerous provisions that propose fundamental changes to our health care system. Many are deeply troubling. One is the call for a Medical Advisory Council that would be comprised of Washington bureaucrats with the power to make significant decisions on health policy for all Americans. This Council would become the Supreme Court of health care, and these unelected bureaucrats would make final decisions about your treatment options.
The Kennedy bill includes an individual mandate requiring all Americans to purchase a health insurance plan approved by the federal government. The Medical Advisory Council would decide what constitutes a “qualified health insurance plan.” It would also determine the “essential health care benefits” that would be included in the much-discussed and debated public-run government plan that would compete against private health insurance plans if it’s created.
To recap: a faceless group of Washington bureaucrats could be making life-and-death decisions about private health care for individuals.
Rather than propose reforms that truly offer Americans better and more affordable health care, Senate Democrats and the Obama administration seem eager to expand the role of government in the lives of individual Americans and their families. By pushing legislation that contains things like the Medical Advisory Board these politicians are endangering our freedoms and seek to come between individuals and their health care choices.
“Save” the Climate — Hurt Farmers
The national energy tax snaking its way through the House of Representatives has a new potential victim — farmers. The cap-and-trade scheme would increase energy prices, building costs and a slow the economy. My colleagues at The Heritage Foundation calculate that farm income, which is the pre-tax amount that farmers live on after all their expenses, would drop 28% in the bill’s first year. In 2035, the last year analyzed, farm income drops a whopping 98%. These numbers should raise a red flag for Midwesteners, and cause concern among all Americans who eat.
Brian Darling is director of U.S. Senate Relations at The Heritage Foundation.
Obama and Your Electric Bill – HUMAN EVENTS.
Click on this link to read the full story. No one was listening during the campaign when Obama warned about this. Now you have it. …..
President Obama’s energy tax plan — a version of the failed European “cap and trade” global warming fiasco — may cost families $1,800 yearly in higher utility bills, far exceeding his promised $800 a year tax cut for 95% of Americans.
While campaigning, Obama admitted that his energy plan would cause electric bills to “skyrocket.” Few took note, perhaps because Sen. John McCain also backed some form of a “cap-and-trade” energy tax.
Obama’s official budget claims that his proposed energy tax would add $646 billion to energy costs over 8 years. But that’s low-balling it.