API response to the president’s offshore development announcement
June 5, 2010
API’s President and CEO Jack Gerard has issued a statement in response to President Obama’s decision to delay and/or cancel offshore development projects and leases. Jack says, “Decisions that impact the industry’s ability to produce the oil and natural gas… will affect the lives of every citizen, every day.” The full statement is available here.
Jane Van Ryan
American Petroleum Institute
Graham, Lieberman and Kerry Want ANOTHER GAS TAX!
May 12, 2010
Editor’s note: Maybe we should have a tea party so they know we are taxed enough already… wait! We already have! Are they listening? NO. Graham, Kerry and Lieberman ALL must go! These three will be up for re-election in 2012. Then we will CLEAN HOUSE!
Today, Congress once again ignored what Americans want and introduced a new gasoline tax as part of a global warming bill that also contains a cap and trade energy tax on utilities. The section on the gas tax begins on p. 361.
Introduced by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT), this bill requires American oil companies to pay a fee to the government for their global warming emissions.
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who helped craft the gas tax, admitted the fee “will be passed on” to motorists in the form of higher gasoline prices.
But Senators Kerry and Lieberman are offended that any American would dare call it a gas tax.
Don’t be fooled. This is a government requirement that will increase the cost of gasoline. It’s a tax. So not only will we have to pay more for gas, we have the added insult of Senators insisting that what we can plainly see as a new gas tax is not actually a gas tax.
The American people know better. And according to an American Solutions poll, 71% of Americans oppose this new gas tax, even if politicians are insisting it is not a gas tax.
In addition, this bill creates a cap and trade system that will dramatically increase the cost of residential and commercial electricity prices.
Even the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office says cap and trade will kill jobs and reduce American productivity.
With one bill, Congress will raise gasoline and electricity prices, raise the cost of energy, and kill jobs. This is not the way to create jobs and prosperity.
This bill is wrong for America. Will you help us defeat it?
We need to get information about this new tax to as many people as possible in the next 48 hours. Please visit our “Action Center” to forward your friends a special message about this gas tax.
Thank you,
Vince Haley
Vice-President of Policy
My Take on Mort Sahl’s Pacific Sun Interview
May 6, 2010
If you haven’t seen Mort Sahl’s interview, you should at least take a look. Fortunately, it’s still online at the Pacific Sun. Though I disagree with some of his political opinions, he isn’t very happy about most politicians, except perhaps Ron Paul whom he mentions favorably.
I was surprised. His take on Obama is right on. After all the promises to do it differently from Clinton or Bush, Obama is still in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He also hasn’t closed Guantanamo. Not that I am against either one, I am just agreeing with his point that Obama, in spite of promises for hope and change, he is more of the same.
Where I also disagree with Sahl is that these two wars are just like Vietnam and that enemy combatants shouldn’t be tried by the military. I was nearly drafted in the Viet Nam War… Drafted. There is no draft. All these soldiers in the Middle East are volunteers so that makes the current wars much different than the one in 1968. Sahl also talks about bankrupting the country, but doesn’t blame entitlement spending which is much more than any war we have fought. He blames paying for the wars as to why we are in debt. WRONG! And why should enemy combatants be tried in civilian courts and given the same rights as citizens? WRONG AGAIN!
Regardless of our political differences, I believe this is one person you could have a sane conversation. Apparently he frequents the Piazza D’Angelo’s in downtown Mill Valley. Who knows? I may have even seen him there and not recognized him!
- FedUpEditor
We Warned You! Gas Tax Coming!
April 28, 2010
Since gasoline prices have leveled out and everyone has gotten used to under $4 a gallon gas, Senators Kerry, Graham (a RINO who needs to be replaced) and Lieberman (remember when people thought he should become a Republican? He also would have been a RINO, something we don’t need in the Republican Party) are not understanding the TEA Parties. Throw them all out next election! - FedUpEditor
On Monday we may see a new gas tax introduced by Senators Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman as part of the energy and climate legislation they have been working on together the last several months.
Earlier this week we asked your fellow American Solutions members in South Carolina to call Senator Graham’s office and ask him not to introduce new gas taxes. Many of them reported back that Senator Graham’s staff responded by saying that Senator Graham does not support new gas taxes and doesn’t have any plans to introduce new gas taxes.
We hope that is true and that Senator Graham, along with Senators Kerry and Lieberman, has indeed changed his mind. If so, it would likely be due in large part to the many American Solutions calls.
But we remain skeptical. We are concerned that the legislation we expect to see Monday will nevertheless contain new gas taxes. For the last several weeks it has been widely reported in the media that the legislation will contain new taxes on gas, diesel, and other transportation fuels. These will be assessed in the form of a fee or other costs imposed on oil companies, which will then be passed on to consumers in the form of higher gas prices.
(At the bottom of this email you will see some examples of reporting on the new gas tax.)
If consumers pay higher fuel prices due to a requirement of government, we at American Solutions consider it a tax, whether it is imposed indirectly at the wholesale level of the oil company and then passed on to consumers in the form of higher gas prices, or directly at the retail level of the average American buying gas at the local gas station. We oppose new taxes on gas, diesel and other transportation fuels, which we believe will kill jobs and stagnate economic growth.
It seems as if the three Senators don’t share this view and believe that new costs imposed on oil companies by the government, which will be passed along to motorists at the gas station in the form of higher gas prices, are not new gas taxes.
We disagree, but we can certainly appreciate why they don’t want their new legislation to be seen as imposing new gas taxes. In a recent poll of 1,000 adults released by American Solutions, we found that:
- 83% of all adults and 61% of independent voters have very little or no confidence that a fuel tax will reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- 71% of respondents oppose higher gas taxes (sometimes called “linked carbon fees”) in order to limit greenhouse gases.
- 78% believe that higher gas taxes will either kill jobs or have no effect on job growth.
- 69% oppose any new per gallon gas tax or fuel tax to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- 64% of all adults are less likely to support a candidate for Congress who supports a gas tax, and 67% of independent voters are much more likely not to support a gas-tax candidate.
With the average gallon of gas already 80 cents higher than a year ago, it is not surprising that the vast majority of Americans oppose new gas taxes, which at least one organization has estimated could increase the cost of gas by 27 cents per gallon.
Come Monday, if the legislation proposed by Senators Graham, Kerry, and Lieberman contains measures that will increase the price of gasoline, you now know why American Solutions considers it a new gas tax and thus will vigorously oppose it. We will also be asking for your help in calling your Senators to oppose any such new gas taxes.
If next Monday the Senators are insisting that they are not introducing any new gas taxes, but instead are describing a “linked fee” or a requirement that oil companies buy carbon permits, you will know that they are supporting a bill that will raise gasoline, diesel, and other fuel prices.
We will report back with analysis after the introduction of the legislation next week.
Sincerely,
Vince Haley
Vice President for Policy
Arizona Passes Law that is Constitutional – Obama Says It’s “Misguided”
April 25, 2010
Newsmax: PHOENIX — The Arizona House on Tuesday approved a bill that would draw local communities deeper into the fight against illegal immigration despite arguments from opponents that it would do nothing to keep people safer.
House Republicans advanced the measure on a 35-21 party-line vote. The Senate approved the bill in February but must concur to changes made in the House before sending it to Gov. Jan Brewer.
Supporters celebrated the bill as a tough crackdown on illegal immigration that will protect the state from violent criminals.
Arizona’s struggling economy has driven many illegal immigrants from the state. But as the economy rebounds, “so too will the illegal immigrants — larger, stronger and more destructive than they were several years ago,” said Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills.
“We need to put this law in place now so that when the new illegal immigrants come, we’re prepared to do battle with them,” he said.
The measure would create a new state misdemeanor crime of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document. It would allow officers to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they’re legally in the country.
The proposal also would ban so-called soft immigration policies at local police agencies. It would allow people to sue if they feel a government agency has adopted a policy that hinders the enforcement of illegal immigration laws.
The provision is designed to target law enforcement policies that prevent officers from asking people about their immigration status, but opponents worry it will make victims and witnesses scared to work with police and prosecutors.
“This is a false hope for the people of Arizona. It’s a false sense of security for our neighborhoods,” said Rep. Chad Campbell, R-Phoenix.
The bill is sponsored by Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who is one of Arizona’s loudest voices opposing illegal immigration.
Tuesday’s vote demonstrated Pearce’s political power at the Legislature and underscored the pressure on Republicans to support crackdowns on illegal immigration. The measure won support from all 35 House Republicans, including a handful who said they had serious concerns with the legislation.
“This bill is filled with problems, huge problems. But more importantly it will not stem the tide of illegal immigration,” Rep. Bill Konopnicki, R-Safford, said before adding that he feels “obligated” to support the bill anyway.
Konopnicki said the best way to address illegal immigration is with fences, electronic surveillance, air support and more border patrol agents.
Read the entire article here.
Lynn Woolsey on a Spending Spree?
April 24, 2010
Is this woman trying to buy votes or what? After the story abour earmarks, I see this KTVU post about another $1 billion she is spending to “restore” the SF Bay. Where is the money coming from? Is she so confident they will get the VAT tax that they will have the money to pay for all this pork? Remember, this is not because of the commerce clause in the constitution they are doing this, but because of the EPA, another huge bureaucracy funded by us. We are not against cleaning up the bay, but use California’s money to do it… What? They are broke too? Those crazy Democrats! – Editor
======================
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, was in South San Francisco
Friday to announce the introduction of a bill to the U.S. Congress that would spend $1 billion to restore and clean up the San Francisco Bay.
The bill, the San Francisco Bay Improvement Act of 2010, would give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency about $100 million annually over a 10-year period to fund projects that would restore the health of the Bay, which has been harmed by pollution, invasive species, and the loss of wetland habitat.
Speier said Congress has spent money on problems with other estuaries, including the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and hoped her fellow members of Congress would approve a bill for the Bay Area.
“I never predict whether a bill’s gonna pass, but I don’t introduce a bill without putting every effort to make sure it will end up on the President’s desk,” she said.
The bill was co-sponsored by the Bay Area’s congressional delegation: Anna Eshoo, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Pete Stark, Mike Thompson, and Lynn Woolsey. SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. — Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Hillsborough, was in South San Francisco Friday to announce the introduction of a bill to the U.S. Congress that would spend $1 billion to restore and clean up the San Francisco Bay.
The bill, the San Francisco Bay Improvement Act of 2010, would give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency about $100 million annually over a 10-year period to fund projects that would restore the health of the Bay, which has been harmed by pollution, invasive species, and the loss of wetland habitat.
Speier said Congress has spent money on problems with other estuaries, including the Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes and hoped her fellow members of Congress would approve a bill for the Bay Area.
“I never predict whether a bill’s gonna pass, but I don’t introduce a bill without putting every effort to make sure it will end up on the President’s desk,” she said.
The bill was co-sponsored by the Bay Area’s congressional delegation: Anna Eshoo, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Pete Stark, Mike Thompson, and Lynn Woolsey…
Read the entire sickening story here.
Lynn Woolsey’s Power Grab – Reclassification of Contractors to Employees
April 23, 2010
Employee Misclassification Prevention Act
In a story that has been circulating, Lynn Woolsey is promoting legislation that was originally introduced by Ted Kennedy before his death. The idea is to reclassify all independent contractors as W-2 employees. The stated intention is to get fair wages and benefits for those who are being exploited by businesses. To quote:
“For too long, workers have been denied vital worker safeguards – like fair labor standards, health and safety protections, and UI or workers’ compensation benefits,” Ohio Senator Brown said. “With still fragile economic recovery with significant job loss – workers are too often taken advantage of and lose out on the benefits they rightfully earned.”
Nothing could be further from the truth. The real story is so they can get their hands on the withholding sooner in their greedy grasp for power and money. Right now independent contractors (of which I am one) get to keep most of their money until the end of the year where they file their return and pay their taxes. There is already a mechanism for estimated tax payments so the government can get is slimy mits on some of the money ahead of time, but the W-2 status would force contractors to pay into social security, medicare, medicaid and other benefits, some of which can be avoided by incorporating. They don’t like this.
Woolsey is a dyed in the wool socialist elitist who is determined to, in the guise of doing a good deed, kill the independent contracting business. Right now, as the economy sags, many people who used to be full time employees have found a safe haven in contracting with companies they used to work for. By making a higher hourly wage, the contractors benefit by having more flexibility of hours and the ability to write off mileage and other expenses they would not be able to do as W-2 employees. The business benefits by not having to pay for health insurance, sick leave, vacation and other perks and so are willing to pay the higher hourly wage. Plus, if things slow down, the contract can be negotiated or terminated if necessary.
Union leader, Jim Hoffa says, “Workers misclassified as independent contractors receive no protection from workplace health and safety laws, no legal rights to equal opportunity in the workplace, no rights to job-protected family and medical leave,” said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. “Their rights to form a union are also denied. These employers are clearly violating federal labor laws and ripping off the American taxpayer. They must be held accountable.”
Translation? “We really don’t care about any of this stuff. It really is because we need more union members, and these contractors are cutting into our bottom line!”
This proves Lynn Woolsey is doing the bidding of big union lobbyists, and it MUST BE STOPPED. It will hurt our already suffering economy by throwing more people out of work. It is just too expensive for employers to hire people full time right now which is why the independent contractor status is so important.
Additionally, it would create yet another government regulatory bureaucracy which will burden the business community AND would be expensive because these new “board members’ would need nice salaries and huge benefits and retirement packages… paid for by us! WE’RE BROKE. LOOK AT THE DEFICIT.
The sole purpose of this bill is to give government more power than it already has. Don’t they have enough power already with the health care take over?
Lynn Woolsey may be reached at http://woolsey.house.gov/contactemailform.asp. Use the Labor drop down and reference “Employee Misclassification Prevention Act” when you write.
FedUpEditor
PS. Vote Jim Judd for Congress in November and we will never have to worry about Lynn Woolsey’s crazy socialist ideas ever again! Let’s send her to the dustbin of history.
Lynn Woolsey Talks about Work-Life Balance Award Act
April 22, 2010
Editor’s note: What business is it of Lynn Woolsey who has never run a business in the private sector? Does she use this same strategy with her own staff? Probably… but with OUR money! This advisory board is another way to grow government and get more people on the Democrat voter rolls.
Besides, if she and her Democrat pals get the agenda passed they are contemplating, there will be no jobs! Do these awards apply to unemployed workers too? Lynn Woolsey is out of touch with her constituents and needs to be retired. In her place, Cotati business man, Jim Judd, is ready for the job!
From Washington DC Enployment Law Update:
On Thursday, the House Committee on Education and Labor held a hearing on the Work-Life Balance Award Act (H.R. 4855), legislation introduced by Reps. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and George Miller (D-CA) that would establish an award for employers that develop and implement work-life balance policies, defined in the bill as workplace practices “designed to enable employees to achieve a satisfactory work-life balance.” The measure would direct the Department of Labor (DOL) to create a work-life balance advisory board to develop criteria that employers would need to meet in order to qualify and apply for the award.
In her opening statement, (pdf) Rep. Woolsey said that the “effort to bring balance between home and the workplace must be waged on all fronts, and many in the business world are leading the way.” She also used the opportunity to promote the Balancing Act of 2009 (H.R. 3047), a bill she introduced in 2009 that combines a number of provisions from previously introduced family and medical leave legislation. According to Woolsey, this bill “lays out a blueprint for balancing work and family.”
Also testifying at this hearing were Carol Evans, President of Working Mother Media; China Miner Gorman, Chief Global Member Engagement Officer for the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM); Victoria Lipnic, Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC); and Portia Wu, Vice-President of the National Partnership for Women.
Lipnic, who emphasized that she was not testifying in her official capacity with the EEOC, explained (pdf) that she deemed worthwhile “any initiative that encourages voluntary efforts for employers to offer work-life policies that work best for their employees and meet their operational needs at the same time.” She did not, however, see the need for the Secretary of Labor to issue regulations to implement this award: “Regulations are about controlling behaviors and specifying outcomes for enforcement purposes. In the case of this award, I do not see a reason for the Secretary to be regulating.”
The other witnesses offered similar praise of the bill’s intent. China Miner Gorman, testifying on behalf of SHRM, said that her organization “and its members support the Work-Life Balance Award Act, a common-sense bill to recognize and showcase those public and private organizations delivering benefit plans and policies that truly help their employees better balance their work and personal life obligations.” Her written testimony (pdf) also provides a set of five principles SHRM has developed “to help guide the creation of a new workplace flexibility public policy.”
Speaking on behalf of the National Partnership for Women, Portia Wu recommended (pdf) that the proposed Work-Life Balance Award recognize the importance of work-family policies that provide paid sick days. She also suggested that the award process involve the “collection and dissemination of data about companies’ work-family policies” in order to inform policymakers, businesses, and the general public about the type and scope of family-friendly policies being adopted in the private sector.
From a Reader
April 22, 2010
From Peter in California:
This one is really informative. You can see how your RAT IS VOTING.
Shortcut to: http://www.killcarb.org/
Editor’s note: Lynn Woolsey Congress needs to become Jim Judd for Congress! California’s 6th District needs him! Bring back jobs! Bring back the economy! Stop the spending! Stop overtaxation!
SF Politician Helps Few at the Expense of Many
April 18, 2010
On April 5, Assemblywoman Julia Brownley changed an existing bill on summary judgments to one that restricts the collection of delinquent assessments. The modified bill raises the threshold for foreclosure from $1,800/12 months to $3,600/18 months.
Good Intentions. Ms. Brownley undoubtedly has good intentions–protecting financially stressed owners from foreclosure. Unfortunately, she is doing so at the expense of everyone else. If associations cannot collect delinquent assessments, their budgets will fall short. To compensate for the drop in revenues, boards have only two options, (i) delay much-needed repairs or (ii) raise dues to make up for lost revenue.
Law of Unintended Consequences. Boards already face threats of litigation from owners impacted by deferred maintenance. If they cut back on maintenance to avoid raising dues, damage from increased roof leaks and plumbing backups will result in expensive litigation and higher insurance premiums. If boards raise dues to pay for higher legal/insurance expenses or alternatively raise dues to avoid litigation, they risk pushing more owners into foreclosure/bankruptcy. Ms. Brownley’s good intentions will have the unintended consequence of actually increasing foreclosures.
Embarrassing Owners. Ms. Brownley did two more things I find troubling. She requires that payment plans for financially stressed owners be (i) negotiated with the entire board rather and (ii) approved in open session. Requiring a meeting with the full board instead of a representative will delay approval of plans since boards meet monthly and not everyone is always available. Moreover, the already embarrassed owner must explain to a panel of five or more neighbors (depending on the size of the board) why they cannot pay their bills. Finally, the payment plan must then be approved by the board in open session in front of even more neighbors. The embarrassment of the process may deter owners from seeking payment plans, thereby increasing foreclosures.
RECOMMENDATION. There are better ways to deal with this problem than pushing even more owners over a financial cliff and increasing the litigation risk to associations. I recommend contacting Assemblywoman Julia Brownley and politely asking her to withdraw AB 2502. In addition, use CLAC’s sample letter on your own letterhead and fax it to Assembly Housing Committee members, by close of business Tuesday (April 20) if you want to be listed as an opponent.
Sincerely yours,
Adrian Adams, Esq.
Adams Kessler PLC
