• Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for March 15th on 20:23

    These are my links for March 15th from 20:23 to 20:26:

    • Sarah Palin: The $4-Per-Gallon President – Is it really any surprise that oil and gas prices are surging toward the record highs we saw in 2008 just prior to the economic collapse? Despite the President’s strange assertions in his press conference last week, his Administration is not a passive observer to the trends that have inflated oil prices to dangerous levels. His war on domestic oil and gas exploration and production has caused us pain at the pump, endangered our already sluggish economic recovery, and threatened our national security.

      The evidence of the President’s anti-drilling mentality and his culpability in the high gas prices hurting Americans is there for all to see. The following is not even an exhaustive list:

      Exhibit A: His drilling moratorium. Guided by politics and pure emotion following the Gulf spill instead of peer-reviewed science or defensible law, the President used the power of his executive order to impose a deepwater drilling moratorium. The Administration even ignored a court order halting his moratorium. And what is the net result of the President’s (in)actions? A large drilling company was forced to declare bankruptcy, the economy of the region has been hobbled, and at least 7 rigs moved out of the Gulf area to other parts of the world while many others remain idle. Is it any surprise that oil production in the Gulf of Mexico is expected to fall by 240,000 bbl/d in 2011 alone?

      But that’s just the Gulf. There’s also the question of a moratorium on the development of Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf. It seems the Obama Administration can’t agree with itself on whether it imposed a moratorium there or not. The White House claims that they didn’t, but their own Department of the Interior let slip that they did. To clear up this mess, Gov. Parnell decided to sue the DOI to get a solid answer because such a federal OCS drilling moratorium would violate federal law.

      ======

      Read it all

      Can 2012 come fast enough for Sarah?

    • Mitch Daniels and Obamacare, Round Two – Daniels has an Obamacare problem that could hurt the repeal movement if he doesn’t deal with it. Turner is creating more Obamacare problems. This isn’t the first time conservatives have danced with the devil on health-care questions (see Massachusetts), but with health-care freedom now at its moment of maximum peril, that needs to stop. It will probably, however, take more than just the usual voices of protest to stop it. Tea Party and traditional conservative groups should perhaps spend less time attacking congressional Republicans over relatively minor tactical disagreements, and more time educating the governors, state legislators, and (yes) policy wonks who are actively implementing Obamacare in their own backyards.

      ======

      Read it all.

      Indeed, Mitch Daniels has an ObamaCare problem

  • Claire McCaskill

    MO-Sen: Complaint Filed with Senate Select Committee on Ethics Against Senator Claire McCaskill

    Missouri Democrat U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill

    It is the private airplane flap again where she paid her own company or her husband’s company with taxpayer funds for a political trip.

    Missouri Republicans have filed a complaint against Sen. Claire McCaskill with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics, calling for an investigation into whether the Missouri Democrat improperly used taxpayer funding to cover the cost of at least one airplane trip to a political event.

    McCaskill, who is up for reelection in 2012, paid more than $88,000 to the Treasury Department last week after a POLITICO report that she had used taxpayer funds from her Senate office account to repay nearly 90 flights on a private plane that she co-owned with her husband and other investors.

    While McCaskill and her aides adamantly denied any ethical violations despite the payment to Treasury, POLITICO later reported that at least one of the flights was purely political in nature.

    On Saturday, March 3, 2007, McCaskill flew from St. Louis to Hannibal, Mo., and back, for the local Democratic Party’s annual Hannibal Days. McCaskill billed taxpayers $1,220.44 for the trip, according to public records. McCaskill aides have acknowledged that the event was only political in nature, not an official function for a senator. Congressional ethics rules and federal law bar the use of taxpayer funds to cover the cost of political events.

    Lloyd Smith, executive director of the Missouri Republican Party, said he had filed a complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee urging the panel to look into the trips.

    “The rule is pretty clear. There is a way you can use a private aircraft,” Smith told reporters during a Tuesday conference call. “It’s obvious there’s been thousands and thousands of taxpayer dollars going to a private entity. How much does she benefit from that vis-a-vis making money on the aircraft is not something that we know.”

    Smith added: “[McCaskill] only sent the money back to the government once the curtain was pulled aside and you can see she used taxpayer dollars for political purposes.”

    The Senator is calling this a mistake but the fact is that she did not look into the matter or reimburse money to the government until she was called on the issue. This will be the source of campaign television ads in which even Michael J. Fox won’t be able to bail out the good Senator McCaskill.

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for March 15th on 14:55

    These are my links for March 15th from 14:55 to 16:50:

  • Amazon Tax,  Internet Sales Taxes

    Overstock.Com Threatens to Terminate California-Based Affiliates Should Internet Tax Legislation – AB 153 Passes

    First, it was Amazon.com which said that should AB 153 which imposes internet sales taxes passes they would terminate their California-based affiliates. Now, Overstock.com has weighed into the flap.

    Board of Equalization Member Senator George Runner today released a letter from Overstock.com indicating that it will terminate its California affiliates should pending affiliate nexus tax legislation become law.

    “This issue is much, much bigger than one company,” said Runner. “A law requiring outof-state retailers to collect sales tax from California consumers could force thousands of online retailers to terminate their relationships with California-based affiliate businesses. This hurts California jobs and revenues.”

    In his letter, Mark J. Griffin, general counsel for Overstock.com, writes that his company has terminated affiliate relationships “in every state where this legislation has passed” and “will do so in California.”

    According to Griffin, in 2009 Overstock terminated 3,200 California affiliates after the Legislature passed a similar measure. When the legislation was vetoed by the governor, Overstock attempted to reinstate those affiliates with marginal success. Griffin estimates the current number of Overstock affiliates in California is approximately 600.

    George Runner is contacting leading online retailers with California-based affiliates in an effort to quantify the potential impact their response to an affiliate nexus law could have on jobs and revenues.

    Runner said, “Taxes have consequences. Too often we assume companies and individuals will keep acting the same after new tax laws are passed. That is simply false. Businesses change their behavior as tax laws change.”

    “Supporters of this proposed policy claim that they want to create a level playing field for businesses that have retail presence in California and are required to collect sales tax. Unfortunately, none of the bills under consideration will level the playing field because out-of-state online retailers will simply modify their business model to avoid collecting California’s sales tax.”

    Runner added, “There are 25,000 Internet affiliates in California who are at risk of being wiped out by this attempted sales tax grab. This law will kill jobs and cost the state revenue as these individuals and businesses close up shop in California.”

    Well, there you go. In the attempt to unconstitutionally grab some additional tax revenue, California Democrats are proposing legislation that will not only increase taxes for California consumers but also cost California thousands of jobs.

    This idea of internet sales taxes for out of state retailers sounds like a “LOSE – LOSE” to me.

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for March 15th on 14:23

    These are my links for March 15th from 14:23 to 14:54:

    • Poll Watch: Boulder, Colorado, Leads U.S. Metro Areas in Wellbeing – Community leaders stand to learn a great deal from cities like Boulder, Lincoln, and Washington, D.C. where wellbeing is the highest.

      Boulder, for example, is second in the nation in opportunities for its residents to "learn something new or interesting," a common feature of the highest wellbeing metro areas in America. Book stores, museums, art exhibits, and non-traditional learning environments, such as topical community seminars at local colleges or Elderhostel programs, could all contribute to enhanced opportunities for residents to learn and grow, which can lead to higher wellbeing.

      Lincoln is third in the nation in having workplaces with supervisors who engender high-trust environments, a characteristic of top management talent and a vanguard of a highly engaged and productive workforce.

      The Washington, D.C.-Arlington-Alexandria metro area has one of the lowest smoking rates among large metro areas in America, at 15%, and a high percentage of residents who visit a dentist at least once per year (72%). Smoking and choosing to skip the dentist are both lifestyle choices that have substantial negative health outcomes downstream.

      ======

      Not really shocking but read it all.

    • On Wisconsin! How Republicans Won the Battle of Madison – It was Wednesday, March 9, and Governor Walker had decided to visit the Wisconsin State Capitol before he headed off to give his “Ag Day” speech that afternoon.

      Walker figured he had been very patient. Four weeks earlier he had proposed his budget repair bill, and he had the votes to pass it. But one week after that, all 14 Democratic state senators fled to Illinois to deny Republicans the quorum they thought necessary to hold a vote on the legislation. In the days that followed, top Republican legislators and senior aides to Walker spoke regularly with Democrats in an effort to forge a compromise—several times believing that they had reached a tentative understanding that would allow the senate to take up the controversial measure, only to have the agreement collapse. The more this happened the less likely a compromise seemed. 

      So, shortly before 11 a.m. on Wednesday, Walker addressed a meeting of the senate Republican caucus. It was time to end the standoff and move forward, he said. The world didn’t know it, but Republicans had been given the tools to do that two days earlier, in rulings from three nonpartisan bodies that allowed them to tweak the bill slightly and pass it with only a simple majority present in the senate. But Walker kept his comments general. He said that while Wisconsinites were divided about the wisdom of his proposals, there was widespread agreement that the stalemate had to end.

      =======

      Read it all.

      A good piece on the last days of negotiations with the Wisconsin Fleebaggers

    • Wisconsin Dem Senator Wants to Ban Tactic Used to Hold Up Budget Bill – Democrat Tim Cullen, one of the 14 Wisconsin state senators who fled to Illinois in order to prevent a vote on Scott Walker's budget repair bill, wants to make sure that the tactic he employed cannot be used in the future to hold up state business. The Wisconsin State Journal reports:

      One of the Wisconsin 14 is working on a law that would prevent other lawmakers from stopping legislation by running away and hiding — a move that could be seen as an olive branch to angry members of the GOP.

      Sen. Tim Cullen, D-Janesville, a key member of the Democratic senators who fled the state in a failed effort to stall Gov. Scott Walker’s budget repair bill, said Tuesday he was drafting a state constitutional amendment that would allow the Legislature to vote on and pass fiscal bills with a simple majority. The constitution requires each house to have three-fifths of all members present to vote on bills that have a fiscal impact.

      “I was part of creating this divide,” Cullen tells the Journal. “I need to be part of fixing it.”

      ========

      Should have been banned long ago. What about initiative and referendum?

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for March 15th on 11:04

    These are my links for March 15th from 11:04 to 11:07:

    • Joseph R. Biden Jr.: The Case for Ratifying New Start – In September 2009, when President Obama decided to alter his predecessor's plans for missile defense in Europe, some critics claimed that we had sacrificed our allies in the interest of the "reset" with Russia. Others thought that we would derail the reset by proceeding with the new plan. The skeptics were wrong on both counts.

      At NATO's summit in Lisbon last weekend, President Obama united Europe behind our missile-defense plans and received strong support for the New Start Treaty that is currently before the Senate. In doing so, he proved that missile defense and arms control can proceed hand-in-hand.

      It's hard to remember how much relations between the United States and our European allies had frayed before this administration took office. U.S. leadership was viewed negatively by many foreign publics, and U.S. policies often met with opposition from our traditional partners. The positive atmosphere in Lisbon—and the substantial progress on priorities like missile defense, arms control and the Russia reset—simply would not have been possible without nearly two years of intensive diplomacy.

      NATO's adoption of territorial missile defense as a new mission shows that President Obama has rebuilt the alliance's underlying consensus about the threats we face and how to meet them. Once considered an insurmountable political, technical and financial challenge, NATO's decision to embrace territorial missile defense demonstrates the alliance's determination to meet 21st-century threats.

      The ballistic missile threat to our allies, partners and deployed forces is real and growing, particularly from Iran. Unlike previous approaches, this NATO missile-defense system will protect all NATO allies in Europe, not just some. And it will protect more European territory sooner than the system it replaced. The capability will improve over time, addressing existing and near-term threats first, then expanding to provide greater coverage and protection as the threat and technology evolve.

      ======

      Read it all.

      What a difference 10 years makes

    • Senator Joseph Biden on "Missile Defense Delusion" from 2001 – Op-ed column from The Washington Post on 12/19/01) (880)
      19 December 2001

      (This column by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., chairman of the Senate
      Foreign Relations Committee, first appeared in the Washington Post
      December 19, 2001 and is in the public domain. No republication
      restrictions.)

      Missile Defense Delusion
      By Joseph R. Biden Jr.

      Washington being what it is, the idea that politics and ideology
      should be set aside for a higher purpose may seem a quaint, naive
      sentiment. But few would argue with the statement that the ultimate
      test in deciding to scrap a treaty that has helped keep the peace for
      30 years is whether it makes the United States more or less secure. In
      that light, President Bush's decision to unilaterally walk away from
      the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty is a serious mistake.

      No one doubts we live in a dangerous world and that our enemies are
      ruthless. But a "Star Wars" defense, assuming it could be made to
      work, would address only what the Joint Chiefs of Staff argue is the
      least likely threat to our national security.

      One of the lessons we should have learned from the devastating attack
      of Sept. 11 is that terrorists determined to do this nation harm can
      employ a wide variety of means, and that weapons of mass destruction
      — chemical, biological or even nuclear — need not arrive on the tip
      of an intercontinental ballistic missile with a return address. That's
      why the Joint Chiefs of Staff argue that an ICBM launch ranks last on
      the "Threat Spectrum," while terrorist attacks constitute the greatest
      potential threat to our national security.

      The administration's obsession with missile defense — with a price
      tag in excess of a quarter-trillion dollars for the layered program on
      the president's wish list — is doubly troubling because of the
      attention and resources being diverted from critical efforts to
      address genuine threats. While the president says nonproliferation is
      a high priority, his actions speak louder. Notwithstanding promises of
      new efforts, the fiscal year 2002 budget that he requested would have
      cut more than $100 million out of programs designed to corral Russia's
      "loose nukes," provide help that Russia has requested to destroy its
      chemical weapons stockpile and prevent unemployed Russian scientists
      from selling their services to terrorist organizations.

      Only when it comes to missile defense is the administration pushing
      hard. But nothing could be more damaging to global nonproliferation
      efforts than to go forward with Star Wars. Russia has enough offensive
      weapons to overwhelm any system we could devise, so the real issue is
      what happens in China and throughout Asia.

      ======

      VP Joe Biden as a Senator had never been a fan of national missile defense, but now?

  • Mike Huckabee,  Mitt Romney,  Newt Gingrich,  Polling,  President 2012,  Sarah Palin

    President 2012 GOP Poll Watch: Newt Gingrich Ties Mitt Romney Without Huckabee and Palin in the Race

    When asked who they want to take on President Obama next year, Republican primary voters nationwide could not be less clear—the usual top four are in a statistical tie, each with less than 20% of the vote and just as many undecided. Mike Huckabee leads with 18%, followed by Mitt Romney’s 17%, Sarah Palin’s 16%, Newt Gingrich’s 14%, Ron Paul’s 9%, Tim Pawlenty’s 5%, Mitch Daniels’ 4%, and Haley Barbour’s 1%. 15% are undecided or favor someone unnamed. Last month, the candidate order was the same, and the proportions a similar 20-17-15-12-8-4-4.

    But the longer these candidates hesitate to jump into the race, the more it appears a few of them may not run at all. Without Huckabee in the field, Romney edges Palin and
    Gingrich, 20-19-18, with Paul at 12% and the others further back. In the absence of Palin, Huckabee tops Gingrich and Romney, 22-20-18. With neither Palin nor Huckabee making a bid, Gingrich and Romney tie at 24%, with Paul at 12%. Palin’s voters go more heavily to Gingrich than to Romney.

    An interesting poll, for what it is worth, being that it is in the early GOP primary states where candidates will win or lose the nomination – not national polls.

    The only question is who will NOT run first?

  • Pinboard Links

    Flap’s Links and Comments for March 15th on 10:28

    These are my links for March 15th from 10:28 to 10:43:

    • Process issue will define CA GOP or NOT – The passage last year of Proposition 14, which replaced part primaries with an "open" primary and run-off in California, has set off a bitter fight inside the California Republican Party, which heads into a convention this weekend in Sacramento girding for a procedural battle that will shape its identity.

      The conservative party leadership, led by outgoing party Chairman Ron Nehring, has proposed that the party choose and designate a candidate despite the changed system, and that only the party choice be able to benefit from — among other things — crucial state party financial support.

      Members of Congress and state legislators, meanwhile, are pushing back quite hard, as in an email earlier this month signed by House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy and others:

       

      [Nehring's proposed] system forces endorsements – even when there are good Republicans running against good Republicans. Worse, should the "endorsed" candidate lose the June election, the actual winner is still not the official nominee of the GOP and could be denied any Republican resources. This is a disaster in the making!

      The second option is an alternative bylaw amendment supported by a vast majority of the Congressional delegation as well as overwhelming majorities in the Senate and Assembly Caucuses that allows the Republican Party to endorse when special circumstances arise – when a Republican otherwise might not make it onto the November ballot or when liberal interest groups or labor unions are trying to elect a sham "Republican" candidate who will not vote for Republican principles. 

      =======

      The real problem is that in California with the open primary and top two system of elections, there is really NO reason to be a registered member of a political party.

      GOP Insiders want to preserve their power of the purse (for what it is worth since the Cal GOP is broke)and endorsements. Exisiting office holders don't want the smoke-filled room full of conservative activists calling the shots – as they routinely stack the County GOP Central Committees.

      If the Ron Nehring proposal passes, there will be a flood of Republicans re-registering to Decline to State.

      And, why not?

    • Dan Walters: Brown-GOP budget talks hit a wall – Confusion reigned in the Capitol Monday over whether Gov. Jerry Brown's overtures to five Republican senators to support his budget plan had utterly failed, or whether suspension of their talks is merely a temporary setback.

      Whatever the case, it appeared that Brown's hopes of placing $10 billion-plus a year in tax extensions on a June 7 special-election ballot had been dashed. Even if a budget agreement eventually emerges, the election will almost certainly be delayed.

      That would seem to be a minor hiccup, but having an election on June 7 – before the summer doldrums set in – has been one of several conditions Brown hoped would give his plan its best chance of winning voter support.

      He also wants at least a veneer of bipartisan support, no active business opposition, a simple yes or no on a single measure, and perhaps an all-mail election to create an optimal climate for what would be, under any circumstances, an iffy situation – asking voters to raise taxes by about $1,000 per family per year in the midst of the worst recession in 80 years.

      ========

      I doubt the tax extensions would pass in any case. The California economy sucks and unemployment is too high.

      The Democrat welfare state has caught up with the taxpayer funders and the cuts will not be pretty.

      But, hey Jerry Brown wanted this job.

  • Amazon Tax,  California,  Internet Sales Taxes,  Proposition 26

    Amazon Internet Sales Tax WILL Require Super Majority in California Legislature

    Robert Ingenito, Chief of Revenue Estimates, California State Board of Equalization

    While the Amazon Online Sales Tax legislation is in “suspense,” Americans for Tax Reform make this point – the legislation will require a 2/3’rds super majority in the California Legislature.

    As it would happen, proponents of AB 153 are operating under the faulty assumption that approval can be had with a simple majority vote of the legislature. Not so fast. As a result of Proposition 26, which California voters approved with over 52% of the vote just last November, lawmakers can no longer get around the two-thirds majority vote requirement to raise taxes simply by denying that what they are imposing is, in fact, a tax increase. Yet that is precisely what Skinner and company are doing in attempting to pass AB 153 with a simple majority vote. Skinner herself claims that AB 153 will yield an additional $250-500 million in taxpayer dollars for state coffers in year one. Objective analysis can only conclude that Rep. Skinner would ultimately find her simple majority assumption to be as valid her assertion that her bill wouldn’t cost jobs.

    Proposition 26 amended the California constitution so that – according to the language of the law – “Any change in state statute which results in a taxpayer paying a higher tax,” which is the goal and purpose of AB 153, is subject to a two-thirds vote requirement. Online sales tax proponents might have had a shot at getting a simple majority, not so with a two-thirds threshold.

    Yes, this is my reading of the law. A two-thirds vote will be required for passage in the Assembly and State Senate. This means there will have to be some Republican votes – a highly unlikely occurrence.

    And, the passage of Proposition 26 was a little heralded silver-lining in the GOP wipe out in last November’s California election. This little proposition will have long-lasting impacts on the growth of California government.