by Gordon Tomb

A Wall Street Journal column by David Deming of the University of Oklahoma should be circulated among the management of every American energy company.

In “What the Oil Business Could Learn from the NRA”, the writer asserts that the fossil-fuel industry repeatedly cedes the moral high ground to the ridiculous claims of environmentalists, while the National Rifle Association consistently refuses to apologize for its position.  The result is an energy lobby whose impotence is a stark contrast to the NRA’s reputation for effectiveness in influencing policy.

The column points to the experience of Pennsylvania’s Eastern Sports and Outdoor Show to illustrate the solidarity of the gun lobby.  The withdrawal of hundreds of show exhibitors forced the cancellation of the show after sponsors announced that AR-15 rifles would be banned from the exposition.

Compare that reaction to how energy companies fall all over themselves to promote cosmetic “green” initiatives that pander to the political correctness of environmentalism.

A few years ago I argued as a citizen in a local Chamber of Commerce meeting against a proposed severance tax on Pennsylvania’s gas industry only to have an industry engineer say his company “expected” to pay such taxes as “a cost of doing business.”  Energy executives, anticipating a beating, often calculate that passivity will minimize the severity of the assault.

Ultimately, the industry avoided a “severance tax” but got an “impact fee” that soaked Pennsylvania gas drillers for more than $200 million last year.  Whatever qualifies as a business “cost”, I have no doubt that the money would be better spent paying royalties to property owners and developing new wells.

This acquiescence is not peculiar to fossil companies:  When the global warming scare was initially advanced decades ago, one of the first to exploit it was the nuclear power industry, which mouthed much of the message of the same green crowd that had been trying to shut down nuclear plants.  In short order environmentalists identified the plumes of water vapor rising from plants’ cooling towers as a contributor to the “greenhouse effect.”

The moral argument often is looked upon as naive by pragmatists in the public policy arena.  The Journal column suggests that the credulous are those who adopt pragmatism as a defense against bad science and cynical politics.

Gordon Tomb is an energy writer and director of communications for the PA Coalition for Responsible Government.  He has worked in the nuclear power and gas industries.  gwtomb@gmail.com

ObamaCare is now the law of the land and has been deemed constitutional by our Supreme Court. These are the facts, whether we like them or not.

There is a last line of defense that can be used to stop the implementation of ObamaCare and that is by defunding it before it is too late.

The current continuing resolution (CR) funding the government expires on March 27, setting up an opportunity for Congress and President Obama to honor the bi-partisan sequester savings already agreed upon. It also presents an opportunity to achieve even more savings by defunding and stopping the implementation of ObamaCare which the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently reported will force 7 million Americans out of their existing health insurance.

Heritage Action has provided a detailed description of the proposed process to defund ObamaCare using this process and needs our help to convince our GOP Congressmen to get on board with this proposal.

Many of us worked hard to ensure victories for the thirteen (13) newly elected Republican Congressmen from Pennsylvania on the promise from each of them to stop ObamaCare and this CR is one of the last chances they have to do so. Let’s hold their feet to the fire and request them to use the continuing resolution process to defund ObamaCare.

When the House considers the next CR, they should demand that all funding for the implementation of these exchanges be rescinded and instead used to pay down the deficit.  At the very least, the GOP Leadership and the Rules Committee should allow an amendment to defund the exchanges in the CR to be brought to the Floor, so that every member of the House can record their position on the repeal of ObamaCare, the most pressing and important domestic policy issue of our generation.

Please contact your Representative here.

On the day after they were sworn in as Pennsylvania’s two newest Republican Congressmen, Keith Rothfus and Scott Perry signaled that they are willing to buck John Boehner and the mainstream GOP establishment in order to achieve meaningful spending reductions. Both voted against sending $9.7 billion to the National Flood Insurance Program, joining 65 other fiscal conservatives who insisted that any additional funds be matched with cuts in federal spending.

It is not easy to vote against something called “$9.7 billion of flood insurance for victims of hurricane Sandy.” But when these Congressmen ran they committed to do something about the outrageous debt and they kept that commitment on Friday by voting against this bill. It was disappointing that they were the only two PA Congressmen to vote against this.

Keith Rothfus

In a press release, Rothfus stated “… I came to Washington to control spending in a sensible manner. The bill passed today costs almost $10 billion and adds to the deficit. My concern is that we in Congress should have worked to find a way to pay for this now.”
.
.

.

Scott Perry

Scott Perry stated ”The federal government is broke. We have obligations to our citizenry,” but not for “pork-barrel projects,” Perry said.

The next shoe to drop in the so-called Sandy relief efforts are attempts next week to pass an additional $51 billion in mostly stimulus and pork barrel funding.

The larger bill, Perry said, still contains items he opposes, including funding for an Alaskan fishery, roofs in Washington D.C., and for President Barack Obama’s healthcare plan. If those items are still there, Perry said he will likely vote nay again.

“I’m hoping (Friday’s vote was) a chance to show the administration that that stuff is not going to fly in this Congress,” Perry said

Bold actions such as this should be rewarded with strong support from supporters of limited government. Please call or email these two patriots and thank them for standing tall on our behalf.

Call Congressman Rothfus at 202-225-2065 (Be prepared to leave a message for the Congressman.)
Email form is at: https://rothfus.house.gov/contact/email-me (note that you need to be in his District to leave an email)

Call Congressman Perry at 202-225-2565 (Be prepared to leave a message for the Congressman.)
Email form is at: http://perry.house.gov/contact (note that you need to be in his District to leave an email)

More details for your use:
Congressman Perry and Rothfus along with 65 other Republican Congressmen had the courage to vote NO for $9.7 billion in Sandy insurance funding!
Why vote NO?
(1)    This legislation proposes to increase the program’s borrowing authority by $9.7 billion. It would be irresponsible to raise an insolvent program’s debt ceiling without making the necessary reforms.
(2)    It is not the duty of the Federal government to be in the flood insurance business. (Look at Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution) Flood insurance should be a product of the private market.
(3)     Why are we borrowing money from China (on the backs of the next generation) to subsidy housing in flood plains? Like all insurance markets its premiums should support its claims. If we the people want to subsidize the poor it should be done via credits and “insurance stamps” and not a Federal program.

Extra information:
We need a debate on how to deal with NFIP’s indebtedness in the new Congress. Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), the new chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said the NFIP’s debt shows it’s not sustainable, and that he would explore ways to reform the program.

“I wish to inform all members in this Congress, our committee will take up legislation to transition to a private, innovative, competitive, sustainable flood insurance market, one that serves the needs of all of our countrymen, but ends the unsustainable taxpayer bailouts once and for all,” he said.

Hensarling said he regrets that there was not enough time to identify spending offsets to pay for the $9.7 billion increase in new debt the NFIP will be able to incur.

“Emergency bills like this should not come to the floor without offsets to pay for it, or structural reforms to ensure that taxpayer bailouts are never needed again,” he said. “Regrettably, less than 24 hours into a new Congress, there is simply not time for this.”

As the law is written, a state can set up and operate the exchange, or they can decline and default to the federal government to do so.  Because the structure and operation of the exchange are dictated by federal statute, the “flexibility” given to the state run exchange does not mitigate any of the malignant ramifications of ObamaCare.

Further, the feds may not be able to set up an exchange; and if they try to impose onPA,PAemployers would have the opportunity to legally challenge the law because of the resultant economic harm of the law.

The word exchange suggests a market place that promotes competition resulting in more choice, lower costs, and higher quality.  We have vibrant free markets for home, auto, life, and other insurance that increase choice, lower costs, and provide higher quality and better customer service without any government mandated and operated “exchange”.

The ObamaCare exchange for health insurance will be highly regulated, offering a few government approved products that will be sold by a small number of insurers that will result in few choices and higher costs.  According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) mandated “essential health benefits must include items and services within at least the following 10 categories: ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment, prescription drugs, rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, laboratory services, preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management, and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.”

The ObamaCare exchange is not as much a market for choice in health insurance, but rather a new government bureaucracy that administers Obamacare’s mandates, subsidies, and regulations.

Obamacare is being progressively rolled out and, as Nancy Pelosi wanted, we are about “to find out what is in it.” Sadly, we will find out that ObamaCare is a health, fiscal, and economic disaster.  Let’s examine the harm that ObamaCare will inflict onPennsylvania’s economy.

Like the rest of the country, manyPennsylvaniacitizens are struggling to find work. Pennsylvania’s most recent unemployment and underemployment rate is 13.9%.  That number does not include those who have left the labor market because they have lost hope of finding a job, or those who have joined the ever expanding disability roles.  And this employment data does not reflect the associated economic reality of minimal or negative wage growth, and job insecurity many of the employed are facing.

Implementing the exchange triggers the imposition of a new costly mandate onPennsylvania’s employers.  Employers with more than 50 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees will now have to pay 60% of the premium of a federally approved health insurance policy or be fined $2000/employee.

What options do these small businesses have to deal with this new mandate?  First, we must remember that small businesses are the engine of employment, creating ½ of all jobs in the private sector.  Unlike the federal government that is funded by taxing, borrowing, and printing money, businesses must be profitable.  To provide products and services at a price (value) that consumers are willing to buy, businesses can only survive if they have higher revenues than expenses.  The Obamacare employer mandate adds to the already enormous tax and regulatory burden on business.

For those employers that decide to provide the mandated insurance coverage, they will find premiums for federally mandated insurance coverage now costs on average more than $15,000 for a family.

“Free” insurance benefits including preventive care, birth control, dependents staying on parents plan up to age 26, etc. all increase the cost of insurance, making it unaffordable for more individuals and businesses.  And costs will continue to rise as more regulations and mandates kick in.

Many employers will elect to pay the $2000 fine rather than spending 60% of $15,000 (i.e. $9000) to provide coverage.  In either case, paying for coverage or paying the penalty, businesses will need to make up that cost by increasing costs to consumers and decreasing wages to employees.

Other employers will shift full-time employees to part-time to avoid paying for insurance or the penalty.  Those businesses with less than 50 FTEs are perversely incentivized not to grow beyond 50 FTEs.

The economic harm described above does not even consider the additional $500 billion dollars of new ObamaCare taxes.

Thank you for your support to block PA from setting up an exchange.  Please encourage the rest of the Assembly leadership, and Governor Corbett to reject a PA run exchange.

The PA government should not want any part of this disaster, and incur new costs to Pennsylvania taxpayers by actively participating with ObamaCare? Pennsylvania should join the increasing number of states who have declined to set up an exchange.

Obamacare is an unfixable mess created by the federal government – let them own it.  May, just maybe after it’s inevitable failure, we will get the true reform we need.

•   Spending cuts and debt reduction are the first priority.
•   Accepting large cuts in social and military spending through the sequester process is preferable to increasing taxes.
•   While the sequester is not an optimum solution, failing to reduce spending and the size of our government is even less desirable.
•   Our debt and the increasing intrusiveness of our government are the greatest threats to our freedoms and the future of the United States.
•   We must reverse our present irresponsible fiscal course now to avoid burdening future generations with unsustainable debt.

If we do not make our views known, we increase the risk of weak-kneed Republicans yielding to big-spending Democrats whose promises of balancing tax increases with expenditure reductions regularly go unfulfilled.

Any supposition that tax increases will be limited to the wealthiest and will not lead to new middle class levies on energy, incomes and you-name-it can only be a self deception given what we know of the Left’s vision of a welfare state.

The popular wisdom is that a compromise must be achieved to avoid the disaster of a “fiscal cliff”.  We say, “Baloney.”  The government’s excessive spending and debt — not a lack of compromise — is the threat to our future.

If you agree, we ask that you call your elected national leaders now.

• Contact your US Congressman
• Contact Senator Toomey
• Contact Senator Casey

On one front (US House), Pennsylvania seriously upgraded their delegation and moved to the right, electing two fiscal constitutional conservatives to replace a Republican RINO and a left leaning Democrat. Pennsylvanians now have 13 out of 18 seats filled by Republicans.

That’s the good news…

Now the bad news: The average Heritage Action score for all Republicans is 54.9%. While that is better than the average Democrat score of  15.7%, it is unacceptable. Our PA delegation is led by usually reliable Joe Pitts with a 77% rating and it goes downhill from there.

Two Shining Stars:

Keith Rothfus

Scott Perry

http://heritageactionscorecard.com/scorecard/img/HAAll.pdf

Dan Focht recalls that Erie and the I-79 corridor extending south to Pittsburgh was “the injection mold capital of the world” supplying manufacturers with the formed components of their products — anything from the caps of toothpaste tubes to household containers and medical laboratory ware.

Now, he laments that the “domestic supply chain is falling apart” as government policies are driving U.S. manufacturers and their vendors out of business.

As the owner of Bioptechs, a Butler-based producer of specialized equipment for the microscopic examination of living cells, Dan has lost numerous suppliers to the decline of domestic manufacturing.

There was the time that an Erie injection mold company that had been a prominent supplier called to tell Dan to come right away to get his mold before it was scrapped.  The company was going out of business and anything not being sold off was being thrown away.

“When I got there I found the football field-size building, previously well equipped, now empty of everything but a few forklifts moving out what little was left,” he says.

Dan managed to retrieve his mold, which he took to a New Castle company.  That company supplied him for 12 years until they dropped him when he became the only remaining customer for their clean room.  The company went out of business just a few months later.  The part is now made for him by a Jeannette company.

In another instance, Dan had to upgrade domestically made circuit boards and could find no U.S. suppliers for the needed advanced components.  Although his boards are still made in Pennsylvania, the parts for the upgrade had to come from abroad.

“It is very hard for producers to compete globally given that businesses are burdened with making up for the inefficiencies of government,” says Dan.

“In my case, the largest part of our customer base are researchers at government-funded institutions such as universities.  With the government being broke and not passing a budget, many of our customers are paying 60, 90, 120 days late.

“The U.S. economy is breaking down and there is no excuse for it other than that we have a bureaucracy choking on the bureaucracy!”

When Dan isn’t running 20-year-old Bioptechs along with his wife, whose salary as CFO is routinely reinvested into the business, he is speaking to community groups and politicians about the problems of the U.S. manufacturing sector.

Dan references a variety of sources, including the National Federation of Independent Business and a paper published in the September/October 2012 issue of “The Journal of Applied Business Research” by John H. Dunn of Robert Morris University

The Dunn paper makes a case that reinvigorating domestic manufacturing would narrow the disparity of incomes between working people and higher income groups because the value-added aspect of manufacturing typically commands a wage premium

Dunn’s policy recommendations include lowering corporate taxes, allowing manufacturers to expense capital investments rather requiring them to depreciate equipment and buildings over longer periods, making trade policies more fair, addressing the causes of excessive litigation costs and reducing the uncertainty of federal tax and health care policies

“Most CEOs polled during the Great Recession cited uncertainty in the economy, especially regarding tax and health care costs, as a significant restraint against new investment,” Dunn writes.  “Traditionally business investment has been close to 17 percent of the GDP as opposed to the present 12.6 percent.”

Gordon Tomb is director of communications for the PA Coalition for Responsible Government. gwtomb@gmail.com

By William E. Been*

CREDO Mobile is now mailing advertising pieces into Pennsylvania promoting their 40% off phone service. Addressed: “Dear Fellow Progressive,” the ad then reads as follows:

• At CREDO, we’re part of a movement that’s fighting the Tea Party-driven forces—and the more people who sign up with us, the harder we fight them.
• As you know, the Tea Party-infused Congress is pushing a radical-right agenda against Medicare and Planned Parenthood, against marriage equality and workers’ rights, while protecting the interests of Wall Street and the wealthy.
• At CREDO, America’s only progressive phone company, we’re fighting back hard.
• And we fight by raising funds for progressive nonprofit groups—we donate a portion of your monthly charges, at no cost to you.

This ad takes on even more significant importance when one recognizes that CREDO is one of the two George Soros super PACs that Alan West has identified in his Florida district working to provide funds to take out their number one congressional target. That CREDO SuperPAC and Credo Mobile are the same is indisputable in that the Vice President and Political Director of CREDO Mobile , Becky Bond, is also the President of CREDO SuperPAC.

Adding more emphasis to the radical nature of CREDO is the fact that Michael Kieschnick is a cofounder of CREDO Mobile and is Senior Advisor to CREDO SuperPAC. Kieschnick was cofounder of the George Soros funded SOS group that is featured in my book as being responsible for the election of Al Franken, the 60^th vote for Obamacare. He also serves on the board of the disgustingly leftist League of Conservation Voters which supported Barack Obama and is partially funded ($608,000) by Henry Paulson who, with Timothy Geithner, were the principals who took down Lehman Brothers and AIG on September 15, 2008.

In addition to Alan West, the CREDO SuperPAC is targeting 10 GOP congressional leaders in their new program titled TAKE DOWN THE TEA PARTY TEN. Their stated objective is “…to hold the worst congressional extremists accountable for their radical attacks on women, science, and equality.  On CREDO Action website, the 11 TEA PARTY targets are defined as having “…voted to redefine rape, to gut the Clean Air Act, to reject the science of climate change, to let women die, and to abolish Medicare.” They continue by declaring these 11 representatives as being “…some of the most odious members of the most extreme Congress in history.” They refer to Michele Bachmann as “Queen of Crazy” and Alan West as “Beyond Crazy”.

This article is intended to alert anyone who receives any advertising from CREDO Mobile that the organization is no more than a front for Progressive Marxist activists supported by George Soros and the radical left. In addition, there can be no question that the targeted 11 congressional leaders need all of our support to the best of our capabilities. Mike Fitzpatick from PA 8^th District is one of the targets that CREDO Action describes as having “…peddled a paranoid Tea Party conspiracy.”

We must never let the Progressive Democrats that hold 160 of the 194 Democrat seats in the House of Representatives regain a Nancy Pelosi majority. The first two years of Barack Obama have proven this beyond any doubt. These anti-American Progressives along with their support groups such as CREDO must be stopped and eventually defeated. God Bless our Great Country!