Thursday, June 30, 2011
Most of all we will hear what each candidate believes to be the answer to the nation’s problems, how to bring the unemployment numbers down, how to rebuild the country, how to improve the average citizens life and you can expect to hear offers of how government either will step in to take care of us or how it demeans us when it does.
Pretty much the same old tired political posturing we always hear while people still remain unemployed in historic numbers and see no way out.
Two areas of importance that receive a lot of lip service are energy and infrastructure. Energy is power. Power to fuel the nation to prosperity and maintain our lifestyle. Infrastructure is freedom of movement in a safe and efficient manner. Both are necessary to move our goods within our borders and overseas.
As important as both are and as much attention as they have expressed towards them during campaigns, it is unthinkable that both are slipping away from us rapidly.
Politicians always cry about improving infrastructure and creating jobs in doing so. They tell us we can put people back to work by “investing” in our infrastructure. But, as we look closer it is appalling to find infrastructure projects that are billed as putting Americans back to work being outsourced to China!
The eastern span of the Oakland Bay Bridge in San Francisco is being replaced after a portion of it collapsed in 1989 during an earthquake. By not seeking or accepting federal funds to build a new bridge, California was able to avoid the “Buy America provisos would probably have required purchasing more expensive steel and fabrication from U.S. manufacturers.”
The state-owned Shanghai Zhenhua Heavy Industries Co. was selected to fabricate 28 sections of the bridge with Chinese steel assembled by Chinese elders, polishers and other laborers totally some 3,000 Chinese working long hours and earning $12 day.
While American workers will assemble the bridge and pour the concrete in America, American workers and steel companies lost out on manufacturing the sections to be used in the $7.2 Billion project.
California’s reason? American steel is too expensive as is the labor costs to manufacture the sections as China has surpassed America and other countries to be the world’s largest manufacturer of steel.
If you believe this is a one-time event that will not hurt American workers, the article linked above informs us, “In New York City alone, Chinese companies have won contracts to help renovate the subway system, refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem River and build a new Metro-North train platform near Yankee Stadium.”
I have no doubt this is being seen in other American cities as China’s industry replaces ours for some of our infrastructure projects.
As China’s industrial might grows so does their energy consumption. While we tout overly expensive, inefficient and unreliable “Green Alternate Energy” sources, China’s might grows by relying on the proven efficient sources of coal and petroleum. Coal & oil they are now trying to buy wherever they can get it.
Here in Washington State, environmentalists are having some success fighting shipments of American coal to China, further denying jobs to American workers at the ports and coal mines.
In addition to our massive coal reserves, America has a lot of petroleum sitting underground within our borders and offshore that are blocked from extracting by environmental regulations and politicians, forcing us to purchase our oil from other countries.
Canada, our closest and largest trading partner is where we receive the majority of our imported oil from and as this blog previously showed HERE and HERE, have billions of barrels of oil in the Alberta Oil Sands they desire to extract and sell to us.
To accomplish that, a pipeline is awaiting approval from the State Department to run from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast. That pipeline, Keystone XL is also being fought by environmentalists and politicians who would rather we be dependent on those so called “Green Energy” sources that have yet to be perfected, cost much more than oil and that do not produce near the amount of energy as does oil.
Did I mention many of those are also coming to America via China?
Of particular concern, as efforts are ongoing in blocking the Keystone XL Pipeline Project and elected officials continue writing and passing legislation keeping our own resources off-limits to extraction, our friends from China are seeking Canada’s oil for their industries.
Unlike America, Canada intends to extract their oil and sell it. Doing so keeps Canadians working, earning paychecks and contributing their share of taxes into the Canadian treasury. By all indications, they would rather sell it to us. But, to keep their people working, if we drag our feet on the Pipeline and cave to environmentalists, who by the way, drive their own cars to their protests, cars requiring petroleum based fuel, Canada may instead sell to China, who is ready to buy now.
Mark Green, of the American Petroleum Institute sees the potential job loss as informs us of a of a new report by the Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) saying, “Onerous regulations, endless layers of red tape, restricted access to critical supplies of domestic energy and a lack of direction from government are only a few of the many examples of artificial barriers that paralyze business and make it difficult for America to grow and prosper.”
At risk, “more than 500,000 potential jobs by 2025 and an additional $51 billion in increased energy costs to the transportation sector over the last year alone” Mark tells us.
We like to think of ourselves as the World’s Lone Superpower and the richest nation on the planet with the highest standard of living. At the same time, though, we forget we are also number one on the list as the nation with the highest external debt, a debt now exceeding $14 Trillion with Barack Obama and several politicians desiring to increase.
Much of that debt is to China.
If we don’t stop this madness soon, one day in the future we will be drilling our own oil resources. Except, we won’t be drilling it for American Industry. We’ll be those $12 a day workers drilling American oil to fuel China’s Industry.
Posted by Lew Waters at 3:22 PM
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Although we have seen his “investments” since winning the office, we have not seen jobs or any relief from dependence on foreign oil. We have seen the LOSS of millions of jobs as one after another, his policies prove to be failures.
Criticizing high gas prices during the Bush administration, he and the Democrats continued to block efforts to recover more of our own oil resources and as gas prices began to jump upwards again during this presidency, efforts at blocking access to our own oil resources have continued with little if any permits given to access our own.
Obama, historically opposed to releasing oil from the Strategic Reserve switched gears as he did during the 2008 campaign and said in March 2011 that he was “considering” releasing oil from the Strategic Reserve as our gas prices again rose to unbearable levels for people continuing to struggle in this elongated recession.
Three months later as he sees his approval rating in the polls dropping fast, he announces he will now release oil from the Strategic Reserve, prompting several to question if the move isn’t more of a campaign tactic than actually caring about the American people.
The American Petroleum Institute, representing more than 470 oil and natural gas companies released a statement criticizing the release saying,
“The release makes little sense for American markets. Crude and gasoline inventories are above average, and crude and gasoline prices have been trending down for weeks, despite the loss of Libyan oil, which markets have already adjusted to. The SPR was intended to be used for supply emergencies. There is no supply emergency. We don’t know what impacts this might have on markets long term. But we could and should be taking steps that would increase our own production by 2 million barrels a day or more for decades, which is possible if the government would grant much greater access to America’s ample oil and natural gas reserves. This would do vastly more to help consumers, increase energy security, create jobs and deliver more revenue to our government. It’s action that would truly strengthen our energy future, not a temporary gesture that has no lasting benefits.”
“30 million barrels is about what our nation consumes in a day-and-a-half. 60 million barrels (the total IEA release) is well under what the world consumes in a day.”
API also challenged the release as a “short term energy strategy.”
Back in August 2008 candidate Obama criticized “the failure of politicians in Washington to think long term about the future of the country,” and by 2011 he is the one failing to actually think in the long term about the future of the country by continuing to advocate moving to unreliable, inefficient and extremely costly “green” energy sources before they are perfected and by denying the use of known billions of barrels of our own petroleum and efforts of fighting the readily available petroleum from our closest neighbor to the north. That is petroleum that could easily meet our energy needs and keep it affordable while those alternate sources are still be perfected so they too might one day be affordable.
Canada, our closest neighbor, our most reliable trading partner and the country we receive some 60% of our oil supply from, is extracting oil from oil sands in Alberta after the discovery of some 170 billion barrels of accessible oil there.
As can be expected, it isn’t without opposition. Some environmentalists are boasting of legal efforts to blocking shipments of massive equipment needed to extract to the oil from the sands HERE and HERE.
To bring the oil extracted from the Alberta oil sands, TransCanada is awaiting approval of a 1,600 mile pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico. Since it crosses an International Border it must have State Department approval.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Subcommittee on Power and Energy are pushing for a decision by November 1 on the Keystone XL pipeline.
Again, as expected, foes to America actually achieving energy security make bogus claims like “If constructed, the pipeline, known as the Keystone XL, will carry one of the world’s dirtiest fuels: tar sands oil. Along its route from Alberta to Texas, this pipeline could devastate ecosystems and pollute water sources, and would jeopardize public health.”
I recently participated in a conference call where this very subject was brought up, transcript here. It was mentioned that oil products have been transferred by pipeline in Canada for over 50 years. It has been and will continue to be done safely. I asked specifically about “state of the art” measures that will be used in the pipeline.
API’s pipeline director replied,
“And when we’re talking about state-of-the-art methods, we’re talking about supervisory control and data acquisition systems where they have thousands of points along the pipeline that can monitor conditions, measure pressure drops, et cetera. That’s tied into leak detection systems. And you know, it’s already – that’s already been seen that these systems can catch changes in pressure at a very quick basis. And that’ll be a feature of these new – the new pipeline.”
“And in addition to that, it’s all the other technologies that go into modern-day pipelines. And that includes corrosion protection systems that will be put in place, as well, as part of the normal construction that happens with modern-day pipes.”
API’s refining manager added,
“One of the things that was considered in the application, and TransCanada is going to comply with, is an additional 57 special conditions that go above and beyond the regulations that would be required by the Department of Transportation in this permit for this pipeline.”
It is also erroneously claimed the oil sands are recovered by “strip-mining that is eating into Alberta's boreal forest.”
In actuality, as was explained in the call,
“the vast majority of oil sands oil will be collected through the SAGD process soon, which pumps steam below ground to heat the sands and coax the oil to flow up the wellbore to the surface. This method of extracting the oil results in significantly less surface disruption and a much smaller footprint. In fact, gravel is placed on the surface to protect the underlying soil under all structures, including the modular sleeping and eating quarters. And after the oil has been extracted, the structures are removed, the gravel is reclaimed and used elsewhere, and the ground is replanted with natural grasses and other plants – the same vegetation that was there before drilling began.”
Where mining of surface sands was performed, the lands have been restored and reclaimed, as shown in the video HERE. The SAGD, or Steam-Assisted Gravity Drainage process is illustrated in the video HERE.
Additionally, we have known deposits of petroleum sitting idle within our own borders that remain off-limits to extraction by oil companies that supply our energy needs and the many other needs we use petroleum for.
Obama issuing the release of what amounts of a couple days worth of petroleum from our Strategic Reserve now while his administration continues blocking development of our own resources carries all the appearances of a political ploy, a tactic to help with sagging poll numbers as he gears up to run for reelection.
Petroleum remains our most economical and efficient source of energy. Future energy needs are being developed and perfected, but currently have shown to be inefficient, overly costly and unreliable as Britain found out some 3,000 wind mills failed to produce the needed electricity when needed the most during a recent severe cold spell.
Barack Obama and his administration are failing the American people.
We need reliable and economical energy sources, as well as the massive numbers of jobs recovering our own resources will produce, not campaign stunts and grandstanding for improving poll numbers.
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:24 AM
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
I didn’t receive a Congressional Medal of Honor because I never performed any act of bravery that rose to the level of sacrifice that would merit one. But, why should that matter? I served a little over 8 years active duty in the U.S. Army, spent 18 months in Vietnam, was shot at, mortared, subjected to rocket attacks and sapper attacks, just like many others.
But, without performing that act of “conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of my life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States,” I am not a recipient.
So, what makes me think I should receive one now?
With apologies to all of those brave men who did receive the medal, it is an analogy to American citizenship, maybe the highest prized accomplishment of legal immigrants to our land and also being sought after now by illegal immigrants, those who have not performed the needed requirements to obtain citizenship, but feel they are entitled due to the length of time they have circumvented our laws to remain in the country illegally or have been employed in a job they feel merits it.
What brings me to this comparison is a recent article appearing in the magazine section of the New York Times, My Life as an Undocumented Immigrant. Written by a Pilipino man, Jose Antonio Vargas, an autobiographical account of his being sent to America at age 12 and his subsequent discovery of being an Illegal Alien at age 16 and various and several measures after that discovery of getting by and advancing as an Illegal Alien.
Unlike some, he didn’t work in the fields; he became an award winning journalist. But to get there, he describes how, using a fake passport, he was able to obtain a Social Security number. Seeing it was stamped “Valid for work only with I.N.S. authorization,” he describes how he and his grandfather, who was a legally naturalized citizen, covered the statement with white tape and made realistic looking copies of the Social Security card.
Next, he describes he “began checking the citizenship box on my federal I-9 employment eligibility forms,” stating “Claiming full citizenship was actually easier than declaring permanent resident green card status, which would have required me to provide an alien registration number.”
Saying he felt guilty, he also says he “needed to live and survive on my own” after being kicked out of his grandfathers home for admitting he was gay, describing coming out on that as “less daunting than coming out about my legal status.”
Fearing he couldn’t qualify for state and federal financial aid for college, due to being illegal, he describes applying for “a new scholarship fund for high-potential students who were usually the first in their families to attend college. Most important, the fund was not concerned with immigration status.” He attended San Francisco State University where tuition, lodging, books and other expenses were funded for him.
He then worked for The San Francisco Chronicle, The Philadelphia Daily News and the Seattle Times as an intern. He lost the internship with the Seattle Times when he had to reveal his illegal alien status.
In 2002 he heard of the proposed DREAM Act that he saw as his ticket to being legal. Consulting an Immigration Lawyer, he was told he would have to “go back to the Philippines and accept a 10-year ban before I could apply to return legally,” that he found unacceptable.
He then says, “For the summer of 2003, I applied for internships across the country. Several newspapers, including The Wall Street Journal, The Boston Globe and The Chicago Tribune, expressed interest. But when The Washington Post offered me a spot, I knew where I would go. And this time, I had no intention of acknowledging my ‘problem’.”
“The Post internship posed a tricky obstacle: It required a driver’s license. (After my close call at the California D.M.V., I’d never gotten one.) So I spent an afternoon at The Mountain View Public Library, studying various states’ requirements. Oregon was among the most welcoming — and it was just a few hours’ drive north.”
He continues, “At the D.M.V. in Portland, I arrived with my photocopied Social Security card, my college I.D., a pay stub from The San Francisco Chronicle and my proof of state residence — the letters to the Portland address that my support network had sent. It worked. My license, issued in 2003, was set to expire eight years later, on my 30th birthday, on Feb. 3, 2011.”
Unfortunately for him, Oregon strengthened their DMV law and he would have to show citizenship. Earlier this year, in February as the Oregon license expired, he simply slipped north across the border and obtained a Washington State drivers license as our legislature refuses to strengthen our law.
Obtaining the Washington Drivers License he says “offered me five more years of acceptable identification — but also five more years of fear, of lying to people I respect and institutions that trusted me, of running away from who I am,” adding “I’m done running. I’m exhausted. I don’t want that life anymore.”
He wrote the article for the New York Times, drawing the sympathy of several in their comments section. He also says he is “working with legal counsel to review my options,” apparently still unwilling to take the needed steps to become a legal citizen.
How is it someone who so flagrantly broke our laws over so many years even has options?
I have no sympathy. An illegal alien is still an illegal alien. Regardless of how good he is at what he does, he knowingly violated immigration laws for many years and took slots that might have benefited legal citizens. He admits to altering a Social Security Card obtained falsely and now, years later, expects legal options?
Therein is my analogy. He has been unwilling to make the needed sacrifices to become legal. Living in the shadows, he sought an easy way where others struggle to become an American citizen.
If under those circumstances he is now entitled to citizenship just for the asking, me and every single person who served honorable in a combat zone should also be entitled to a Congressional Medal of Honor and all of the prestige and benefits associated with it.
Of course, we wouldn’t receive one and I doubt any would accept it without having made the sacrifices. To do so would greatly cheapen the medal and its meaning.
Likewise, handing out citizenship to those who knowingly violate our immigration law cheapens American citizenship, which I believe to be one of the most sought after prizes in the world.
Posted by Lew Waters at 10:40 PM
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Besides the obvious implication of racism in the title, before you jump on me for being racist, allow me to point out that the title is a quote from Charles Rynerson, a demographer at Portland State Population Research Center and used in an article published in the Columbian, County’s surge in children bucks local, national trends.
The article goes on to tell us that we have seen a, “13.7 percent upsurge in the number of children in Clark County in the past 10 years, the largest growth in the Portland metro area and a trend that goes against the national tide of stagnation.”
We then read of all of the usual reasons, no income tax, lower cost of living, etc, etc. Then, towards the end of the article, we find,
“Latinos also played a role Clark County’s growth in children.”
“The county’s Latino community doubled in number since 2000, and Latinos younger than 18 accounted for about 10 percent of the net gain of 66,535 children in Clark County since 2000.”
“Rynerson of Portland State said Latinos tend to have higher fertility than non-Latinos.”
“In many parts of the nation, the population of children increased only due to Latinos, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.”
To quote my buddy Lou Brancaccio, editor of the Columbian, “HUH?”
To add another “HUH?” we need only look back a couple months to February when a Seattle Times article said, Illegal-immigrant numbers in state jump 35% in 3 years.
To be fair, Latino’s only comprise slightly over half of the illegal-immigrant population, according to the Seattle Times.
How many of those Rynerson speaks of are here illegally? That is left unsaid.
But, a few questions do some to mind.
Isn’t the claim of Latino’s tend to be more fertile than non-Latino’s racist in nature? Yet, not a peep out of anyone.
Besides racism, is it that those Latino’s follow the main religion of Hispanics, Catholicism, and do not use birth control?
Are struggling taxpayers footing the bill for illegal immigrant babies?
Would the increasing number of Latino’s that are here illegally be here should we actually enforce our immigration laws?
Enforce our laws?
I am left nearly speechless at the lack of outrage over such a racist comment that if I or any other right-wing blogger said it, we would automatically be labeled racist.
I am equally astonished at how those on the left continue to turn a blind eye to the problem of illegal immigration while discouraging people from procreating, yet embrace illegal immigrants who do and look forward to more coming in.
Who gets to pay for all of this?
You and I.
Posted by Lew Waters at 4:44 PM
Saturday, June 18, 2011
It must not be an easy job leading the counties mouthpiece for just about every taxpayer rip-off that comes down the pike and promoted by the downtown mafia, but from all looks, Lou Brancaccio is doing a pretty good job carrying their water. All too often, you would think he actually supports many of those taxpayer rip-offs himself.
That must be what leads Lou to write a column and end his hit piece with how much he likes local businessman and arch nemesis of the loot rail mafia, David Madore. Madore was In-N-Out
After taking a half-hearted if not misguided slap at Sarah Palin (falling on comedian Tina Fey’s depiction from Saturday Night Live of seeing Russia from her house), Brancaccio says, “Madore has sort of parlayed all of this into creating himself as a bit of a kingmaker. A behind-the-scenes kind of guy who could make or break you.” He continues, “If you hope to be a kingmaker, you, ah, need to make a few kings. His track record at backing the winning horses? Not too good.”
To my knowledge, David Madore has been publicly involved in only one campaign season.
Oddly enough, Brancaccio claims, “getting out of the race, after being in it for only a few days, creates its own set of problems. It raises all kinds of questions.”
Yet, a sitting legislator who abruptly quits office, shortly after winning the election and in the middle of legislative session drew warnings on raising those questions on the Columbian website.
Over the months since David Madore gained public notice due to involving himself in some campaigns and contributing funds to candidates, the Columbian has labeled him “a staunch critic of the proposed Interstate 5 bridge, Anti-tolling activist, a crackpot (by commissioner Steve Stuart & apologized for), alluded to as a goofball (by Rep Jim Moeller)” and of course, we read Stephanie Rice’s depiction of those agreeing with him as “Madoristas.”
Also alluding to Madore, the late Tom Koenninger in one of his last editorials wrote, “The ‘know-nothing’ group must be challenged. They can’t be allowed to continue haranguing the council on false issues containing more paranoia than truth and setting up ‘straw men’ that have no factual foundation.”
Suffice it to say, by all appearances, David Madore hasn’t been the Columbian’s favorite citizen.
And his withdrawing from an election shortly after filing has Lou Brancaccio using his journalistic “huh” a few times as if Madore is the first ever candidate to withdraw soon after filing. Brancaccio didn’t bat an eyelid when Woodland city council woman Marilee McCall withdrew her candidacy for Woodland mayor shortly after Madore withdrew his.
I did get a chuckle out of Brancaccio’s comparison of Madore with Muppet character Guy Smiley, as he extended the papers lighthearted, good natured ribbing of other political figures to Madore. Even David Madore chuckled over it.
Seeing how David Madore has gotten under the skin of the downtown light rail mafia, and their mouthpiece, acknowledging Lou’s claim of “all great ideas should be stolen,” I thought about a Muppet comparison for him.
Who loves ya, Lou? Me! (And Count Von Count)
Posted by Lew Waters at 11:53 PM
Friday, June 17, 2011
We heard claims of “Thousands of people die each year because they do not have health insurance or their policy does not cover the medicine or procedures they need,” and “Take a look at our life expectancy and infant mortality rate and you will find the USA has one of the highest rates of infant mortality among Industrialized nations and ranks with the lowest in life expectancy.”
Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) informed us, “Reform is neither easy nor cheap, but the cost of inaction is far greater – in terms of lives lost, quality of life, and dollars.”
Who can forget the graphic display of former Florida Democrat Alan Grayson as he announced on the House Floor, “the Republican plan for uninsured Americans is ‘don’t get sick, and if you do get sick, die quickly?”
A recent column in the Missourian claimed, “Repealing or preventing health care reform will likely kill many more people than terrorist attacks.”
In essence, Obama and the Democrats struck fear in the hearts of citizens with bombastic claims of people dying in the streets, dropping like flies unless we handed healthcare over to them.
After all of the rhetoric and pushing through the healthcare abomination, we read in a recent USA Today, “Age-adjusted death rate for the U.S. population fell for the 10th year in a row to an all-time low of 741 deaths per 100,000 in 2009. This is down from 758.7 deaths in 2008.”
The article also says, “The increase in life expectancy and decline in death rates for major diseases are encouraging, says Ralph Sacco, a neurologist and president of the American Heart Association, and show ‘that our treatments and prevention programs are working’.”
Oh, they claim we are still behind other industrialized nations, alluding to European nations with socialized healthcare, but a look towards those nations sees economic woes worse than ours and calls to transform their socialized medicine to more of private healthcare system.
But, the question remains, since America’s death rates have been decreasing and life expectancy increasing during the time of the heavy rhetoric selling Obamacare, just why did we need to hand a well functioning healthcare system over to the government?
If healthcare in America was so dysfunctional, as claimed by proponents, just how do they account for this increase in life expectancy and death rates decreasing long before shoving this abomination down our throats that hasn’t even taken effect yet?
Once again, the simple philosophy I learned long ago, “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” was ignored.
How that will affect death rates and life expectancy remains to be seen.
But, we also know Obamacare was never about improving America’s health, but about controlling the people.
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:12 PM
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Weeping Over Government Job Cuts, Ignoring Government Blocking Hundreds of Thousands of Private Sector jobs
But, that is just what John Laird has done with his Sunday, June 12, 2011 editorial Fist-bumps in anti-government crowd.
From his grossly out of context Reagan quote, “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem,” to his mischaracterization of conservatives as “anti-government” instead of what we really are, “limited-government,” Laird laments on government jobs being lost in this “Great Recession.” Even on his facebook page, he labels the editorial, “Reflections on the recent wave of cuts in government jobs,” ignoring millions of private sector jobs lost since the Great Repression began in 2007.
While Laird whines about government jobs lost, he completely ignores the ongoing efforts of that very government in blocking private sector jobs at the ready by the hundreds of thousands for several years. Jobs that not only are good paying, but that would spur supportive jobs while at the same time helping to end our reliance on foreign sources for our energy security.
Yes, the Oil Companies, hated as they are while they continue to supply our most efficient and economical energy needs, keep the nation moving our goods and supply the much needed material for computers, medical supplies, clothing and even sanitary components for our Hospitals have been seeking to expand their operations in recovering billions of barrels of our own petroleum within our borders and off our shores, efforts that continue being blocked by the very government now crying over reduced revenues that force cutting those government jobs.
Recovering our own sources from fields previously seen as too expensive have become economical as OPEC continues to play with their price for crude oil, driving it up over $100 a barrel in recent months. Economists associated with the American Petroleum Institute, after studying data supplied by the U.S. Government have concluded that the United States and Canada could provide 92% of America’s liquid fuel needs by 2030 and decrease our dependence on the rest of the world by 22%.
Besides the usual dragging of their feet and denial of drilling permits, egged on by EPA rules and environmentalists, a pipeline has been proposed to carry the oil from Canadian Fields to America’s Gulf Coast refineries. The Keystone XL Pipeline is proposed to carry the oil sands down from Canada into America and awaiting State Department approval since it crosses an International Border.
API president Jack Gerard says the “Canada Pipeline Is Critical to U.S. Energy Security.” Needless to say, the EPA has “issues” with the project that again deny and block much needed jobs for American citizens, jobs that are also needed to refill the treasury that pays for all of the government jobs and programs that now have to be cut due to reduced revenues coming in.
A recent Fact Sheet released by API states,
“A recent study found that more than 340,000 new jobs could be created here in the U.S. between now and 2015through a full utilization of Canada’s oil sands. One pipeline construction project alone, the Keystone XL Pipeline, which will increase the amount of Canadian oil coming into the U.S. is projected to create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs here in America.”
It also states,
“Almost 1,000 American companies from 47 states are already involved in the development of Canada’s oil sands. A variety of American companies manufacture equipment and products that are then used in Canada for oil production, everything from engines made in Indiana to tires made in South Carolina. In addition, U.S. dollars sent to Canada to purchase energy resources can end up back in the U.S. through the purchase of finished products and other American goods. In fact, increased development of Canadian oil sands is expected to add more than $30 billion to U.S. GDP in2015 alone.”
For those who will continue hawking the canard of job growth due to “green energy” and “alternative energy,” a recent Wall Street Journal articles informs us,
“The great energy irony of recent years is that governments have thrown hundreds of billions of dollars at wind, solar, ethanol and other alternative fuels, yet the major breakthroughs have taken place in the traditional oil and natural gas business. Hydraulic fracturing in shale, horizontal drilling and new seismic techniques are only the best known examples.”
“Private companies must innovate to survive, and they have the profit incentive to do so, while government cash is usually steered to politically favored companies that may or may not know what they're doing. If you live off federal grants, you need to work the corridors of power more than the technology. Federal grants for cellulosic ethanol are rife with political earmarks, for example. This is why these columns have argued that the political fad of alternative energy has misallocated scarce capital when the economy can least afford it.”
The jobs are there. The energy sources are there. The willingness is there. And, government blockades are there as well. While the current administration continues running around seeking more foreign sources of energy, we have that and more sitting idly under our own ground right here in America.
How correct the words spoken by Ronald Reagan and quoted out of context by John Laird are proving to be, “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we’ve been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden.”
The more than 470 oil and natural gas companies represented by the American Petroleum Institute are prepared to carry their share of the burden today, providing jobs and energy security. As Mark Green says in the video above, “America’s Oil and Natural Gas companies can provide energy security. The only question is will our government let them.”
Isn’t that a question a political editor like John Laird should be asking?
Posted by Lew Waters at 7:12 PM
Thursday, June 09, 2011
Should the city have the keys to all business, apartments, and rental properties within a city? The Cedar Falls, Iowa city council thinks so.
This past May, council began holding hearings on passing an unfunded mandate on property owners requiring them have keys to their property in lock boxes to give emergency responders easier access to the property, in case of an emergency. The boxes will cost property owners between $250 to as high as $2,000 if passed.
Nothing could possibly go wrong, could it?
Posted by Lew Waters at 12:33 AM
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
Friday, June 03, 2011
In a recent exchange with Vancouver's Mayor Tim Leavitt on the Columbian's web page (in comments), he wondered about my saying I would not make the mistake of supporting him again. In addition to the reasons I listed there, the following video compilation should also explain the beginning of my decision to not support him should he run for another term when this one is up.
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I believe every effort must be made by people to keep their word.
Leavitt's turn around on tolling of the Columbia River Crossing is a sell-out in my estimation. He claims he could see no other way to fund the boondoggle project, yet when campaigning he boasted of years of involvement in all of the intricate matters of it while on the C-Tran Board.
Lest you think this is single issue matter with me, it is not. I also am disturbed by his lack of seeing how a proposed Special Events Ordinance easily could have impaired free speech as well as his spineless conduct during the now famous 'Gavel Down' incident with city council member Jeanne Harris, September 2010. Ducking out at the last minute on an interview with my friend Victoria Taft and efforts to silence critics at council meetings didn't help him in my eyes either.
While I have appreciated his stand on helping out the local VFW Post and showing honor to Veterans as well as a few other lesser issues, his lying outright to get elected to the office over shadows them.
We need honorable people in office if we are ever to turn the city, county and country back around.
Tim Leavitt is sorely lacking in that regard as far as I am concerned.
Fortunately for Tim, he isn't up for reelection this year.
Posted by Lew Waters at 10:15 PM