January 2012

Vladimir Putin: Chevron’s Man of the Year?

by Sam Kazman on January 12, 2009 · 25 comments

in Energy, Features, Zeitgeist

I don’t know what the situation is in other areas, but Chevron’s use-less-energy ads, launched last fall, are still thick and heavy in the DC area.  Its campaign, dubbed “Will You Join Us?”, shows people promising to use their cars less and “unplug things more.”

The print ads are plastered over subway car interiors and bus stops, while the TV spots proliferate during the Sunday morning talk shows.  For reasons I’ve described elsewhere, I don’t like them.  Oil gets demonized by lots of groups these days, but the notion of an oil company dissing its chief product seems perverse, and doesn’t bode well for the future of mobility.

So what does Chevron think of Vladimir Putin’s recent cut-off of Russian gas to the Ukraine and beyond? It seems to me that Chevron should applaud him.  Putin may have monetary and military reasons for his action, but he’s also reducing energy use and encouraging conservation.

I think Chevron should give Putin a major role in its ad campaign.  Here’s CEI’s suggestion:

vladimir_putin-4-crop

The Answer to Global Warming?

by Doug Bandow on January 10, 2009 · 3 comments

in Environment, Global Warming

The Washington Post sponsors the weekly “Style Invitational,” officially deemed a humor contest but very often covering matters of great substance.  This week the Post requested proposals for government spending to stimulate the economy.

My personal favorite came from David Garratt of Glenn Dale, Maryland.  He suggested:

Start a massive advertising campaign encouraging citizens to participate in Leave Your Refrigerator Open for 24 Hours, to help counter global warming.

Works for me!

Dishonoring the Heroic Passengers on Flight 93

by Doug Bandow on January 10, 2009 · 11 comments

in Legal, Personal Liberty

We all should be thankful for the heroics of the passengers of Flight 93 on September 11.  They prevented the hijackers from crashing another plane into another target–the Capitol or White House.  Understandably the families want a memorial honoring the passengers.

But now they are urging President George W. Bush to just grab the property.  Reports the New York Times:

Frustrated by years of negotiations over a parcel of land deemed critical for the proposed Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pa., a group representing the victims’ families has asked President Bush to issue an executive order allowing the Interior Department simply to take it.

The formal request was made in a three-page letter delivered to the president’s office in December.

“With less than two months left in your term,” the letter said in part, “we are writing to ask that one of your final acts in office be to guarantee that the memorial to the heroes of Flight 93 — men and women whose heroism you have invoked so powerfully and eloquently over the years — moves forward as you intended.”

Carlton Carroll, a White House spokesman, said the president’s office was considering the request. The families are hoping that the first phase of the memorial will be ready for the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The leader of the families’ group, Gordon W. Felt, whose older brother, Edward, was one of the 40 passengers and crew members who died on United Flight 93, said Mr. Bush’s help had been sought because “we just thought it would be prudent of us to remind the president that we’re still here and we’re trying to get this project done.”

The executive order would allow the government to take immediate possession of a 273-acre property that includes most of the area where the plane crashed and broke up. It is this area, sacred ground to many, that is considered most crucial to the building of the memorial, some 60 miles southeast of Pittsburgh.

Under such a “quick take” action, a court would decide later the fair value of the land. Ordinarily, land does not change hands in an eminent domain proceeding until a value is set by a court. But that process could take years, and Joanne Hanley, superintendent of the memorial, said that if its first phase was to open in 2011, as the families hope, construction must begin by this fall.

It’s worth remembering that the owners of the land where the plane crashed were innocent victims too, though the harm they suffered obviously was much less.  The property belongs to them, and the Constitution protects property ownership.  Indeed, that protection is one of the fundamental tenets of American liberty.

Although the process of negotiation has been slow, it is succeeding:  the park service owns about 1300 of the 1700 acres that it wants for the memorial.  When the memorial measure was passed in 2002 Congress explicitly forbade use of eminent domain–a fancy name for government theft in far too many cases.  That was changed by an obscure amendment in a large spending bill in 2007 (no one has fessed up to being responsible), but that still doesn’t make it right.

The passengers on Flight 93 represented the best of America.  We should honor them by respecting the liberties they ultimately were defending.  President Bush (and Barack Obama, after he takes office) should give the families a respectful no to their demand that Uncle Sam simply seize the land.

SEIU’s California Scheming IV — and Illinois, too

by Ivan Osorio on January 9, 2009

in Economy, Labor, Politics as Usual

Service Employees International Union (SEIU) finalized a contentious merger of several California locals into a statewide “superlocal.” Sal Rosselli, the head of one of the locals that was dissolved in this process, has fought the centralizing efforts of SEIU President Andy Stern, but, as evident not, to no avail. SF Weekly‘s Matt Smith notes:

The move is seen in U.S. Labor movement circles as a ploy to neuter Sal Rosselli, president of United Healthcare Workers – West.

Rosselli has clashed with Stern over  a 2004 agreement with nursing home chains in which the union supported legislation curtailing patient rights in exchange for permission to allow the union to recruit members at certain facilities. Today’s move erodes Rosselli’s clout by two-fifths, and paves the way for a new nursing home lobbying/organizing agreement.

This mega-merger of California local unions comes at what should be an awkward time for SEIU, considering its recent high-profile scandal in that state — and nationally. The head of a Los Angeles SEIU local was recently forced to resign after the Los Angeles Times broke the story on a corruption scandal there. And Stern himself may soon face some embarrassing questions regarding his relationship with disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.

For more on SEIU see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here

Bonding with Bill Richardson

by Cord Blomquist on January 9, 2009 · 2 comments

in Economy, Features, Politics as Usual, Stimulus to Nowhere, Zeitgeist

The New York Times reports today that the municipal bond scandal extends much farther than New Mexico’s Governor’s office.  The scandal has already forced New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson to withdraw his name as Barack Obama’s appointee to the position of Commerce Secretary and may bring down other state and local officials around the country.

The Times illustrates just how widespread the scandal is:

Three federal agencies and a loose consortium of state attorneys general have for several years been gathering evidence of what appears to be collusion among the banks and other companies that have helped state and local governments take approximately $400 billion worth of municipal notes and bonds to market each year.

E-mail messages, taped phone conversations and other court documents suggest that companies did not engage in open competition for this lucrative business, but secretly divided it among themselves, imposing layers of excess cost on local governments, violating the federal rules for tax-exempt bonds and making questionable payments and campaign contributions to local officials who could steer them business. In some cases, they created exotic financial structures that blew up.

People with knowledge of the evidence say investigators are not just looking at a few bad apples, but also at the way an entire market has operated for years.

CEI Senior Fellow Eli Lehrer had this to say about the scandal:

There’s still a lot we don’t know about when it comes to these bond issues. The municipal bond markets are notoriously complex and crowded with fancy accounting. There’s a lot more we need to know before we jump on the banks but, at the same time, it seems quite possible that laws were broken.

Eli’s correct in saying that there is still more that needs to known before we can say for certain who’s broken the law, but the source of this sort of problem is well known.  Whenever governments start handing out vast sums of money, bribery, vote buying, and the selling of political favors will spring up.  Government money is like Miracle Grow for corruption.

If this kind of corruption can happen as a result of the $400 billion per year bond market, just imagine the kind of runaway scandals we’ll be seeing as Barack Obama and the 111th Congress gear up for handing out $750 billion to “stimulate” the economy.

2009 is going to be quite the year.

Ecuador’s Mining Law and the 70% WFT

by Silvia Santacruz on January 9, 2009 · 1 comment

in Energy, International, Regulation, Trade

Ecuador, the only Latin American country that lacks large-scale mining operations, is passing a new mining law that will lift a six-month ban on mining operations. However, a feared windfall tax (WFT) on mining profits — one of the biggest concerns among international investors — is not an issue that is open for debate in the Andean nation. As of this writing, it looks as though applying a WFT on mining profits will be a done deal.

Chatting with Maria Paula Romo, former VP of the mini Congress, when visiting Ecuador last March 08.

Chatting with Maria Paula Romo, former VP of the mini
Congress, when visiting Ecuador last March 08.

Hoping to influence the interim Congresillo’s legislators, who will be discussing the law in a second debate next week, I recently published an Op-Ed column on the WFT in the Quito-based El Comercio, the nation’s most politically important newspaper. In the piece, I talk about how the U.S. President-elect is backpedaling from his plan to establish a WFT on oil company profits due to the economic downturn:

The United States president-elect, Barack Obama, dismissed his proposal to impose a 20 percent windfall profits tax (WFT) on oil companies in a move to adjust his campaign promises to the global economic recession. His decision was made despite firms such as Exxon Mobil having recorded historic profits in Q3 2008. Ecuador, however, applies not only a WFT to the oil industry in a much higher percentage -70 percent – but will extend it to mining companies if the law that the National Assembly is currently analyzing is approved without amendments.

Read the complete translated Op-Ed

Go to the original Op-Ed - Spanish only –

For many nations of the world, the days of wine and roses have been replaced by an economic downturn. Oil and banana export-dependent Ecuador is no exception. Siphoning resources away from an industry that creates jobs, develops infrastructure and invests in corporate social responsibility programs is not a good idea during an economic downturn.

Stimulating Alternative Energy

by Iain Murray on January 9, 2009 · 4 comments

in Environment, Global Warming, Politics as Usual, Stimulus to Nowhere

In his speech on the stimulus package Thursday, President (Elect) Obama promised to double alternative energy use in three years. How likely is this?

Well, for a start we don’t use much alternative energy to begin with – slightly less than 7 quadrillion BTU of the 101 quads we use as a nation annually. Of those 7, 2 quads are related to the use of wood as fuel, something which is not normally viewed as environmentally friendly, and 2.5 are hydropower, an energy source once thought as environmentally friendly but now usually opposed as destructive. Of the remaining 2.5 quads, biofuels provide about 1 quad, and biofuels have become increasingly controversial and opposed – rightly – by many green environmental groups (source for these figures here).

So the more “acceptable” forms of renewable energy – “waste” biomass, geothermal, wind and solar – only provide just over 1 quad between them. Wind provides 319 trillion BTU and solar just 80. If these two forms of renewable energy are going to form the basis of Obama’s promise, the increase in scale needed to provide 7 quads between them in three years is simply inconceivable. A seventeenfold increase in these forms of energy would be a vast achievement, and one that would surely be trailed in the speech. It would presumably also require at least a seventeenfold increase in subsidies ($740 million in 2007 – see Table ES5 here) to about $13 billion annually, about the same as the Detroit bailout.

It seems likely, therefore, that, while there will be some wind and solar investment, perhaps some significant amounts, to meet a target of an extra 7 quads of energy, the only feasible source that is scalable to the intense required will be biofuels, but even that will require a massive expansion, and one that will have significant implications for crop prices, food prices and land use. The consequences may prove unacceptable to all but the agribusiness lobby and farm state politicians.

So it seems likely that the target of doubling the use of renewable energy does not actually refer to the full range of renewables at all, but just to those “acceptable” alternatives. This would imply that the target is only 1 extra quad of renewable energy by 2011, which, while it would represent a significant expansion of those industries, would amount to just a “drop in the bucket” of total US energy use. And, as we hear in the debate over ANWR every time it comes up, a “drop in the bucket” is just not worth doing…

It appears that this part of the stimulus package is, at most, a shibboleth.

Democrats Poised for Yet Another Land Grab

by Richard Morrison on January 9, 2009

in Energy

In these troubled times, Congress’ plate is piled high with vital legislative priorities. Naturally, upon getting to work this week, the Senate is zeroing in on the most important of all: taking millions of acres of land that may yield a vast amount of natural gas and other mineral resources and locking them away from development forever. Take that, energy crisis!

Our very own Myron Ebell had something to say about this move in a press release today:

The Bingaman-Reid bill is full of bad provisions, but the worst are the ones that would prohibit oil and natural gas production on more than a million acres of federal land. Tens of millions of acres of federal lands in the West have already been withdrawn from mineral and energy production. The new Congress should be opening some of these areas, which would help increase domestic energy production and lower prices. Instead, faced with declining natural gas production and potential shortages in the near future, the first bill that Majority Leader Harry Reid wants the Senate to consider would take 1.2 million acres in Wyoming with high natural gas potential out of production.

I should also point out that property rights advocates like the Competitive Enterprise Institute have long opposed expanding federal land ownership, in part because of the federal government’s poor track record in managing the lands it already controls. Management strategies adopted by the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and National Park Service have led to destructive wildfires, habitat loss, and the spread of pests and disease in large swaths of forest and range land throughout the Western United States. Over one hundred non-profit groups last November sent a letter to the Senate raising concerns about an earlier incarnation of the current legislation.

ADDENDUM: CEI adjunct fellow Bob Nelson has been writing about the deficiencies of federal land management for quite some time – his Forbes column from 2000 is an excellent introduction to the topic. In depth researchers will want to get a hold of a copy of his book, A Burning Issue: A Case for Abolishing the U.S. Forest Service (Rowman & Littlefield).

Stimulus Roadblock

by Julie Walsh on January 9, 2009 · 1 comment

in Bailout Watch, Economy, Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Stimulus to Nowhere

Psalm 7:15,16 He who digs a hole and scoops it out falls into the pit he has made. The trouble he causes recoils on himself; his violence comes down on his own head.

They’ve waited for this day. Billions of dollars potentially at their disposal. But the environmentalists may not be able to use it because of something they themselves created: NEPA.

The projects for the “stimulus package” need to be implemented quickly or they can’t exactly meet the goal to reduce the length and depth of this recession; however, the projects to build windmills or solar panels and such would require years to fulfill the siting and zoning requirements, not to mention lawsuits, of the National Environmental Protection Act.

Governor Schwarzeneggar has already discovered this. Tuesday he asked Obama for $44 billion in transportation, energy and water projects but also requested action to “waive or greatly streamline National Environmental Protection Act requirements consistent with our statutory proposals to modify the California Environment Quality Act for transportation projects.”

Will the liberals’ environmental base sit idly by and let huge transportation and energy projects go forth without extensive environmental review? But how can they sell projects that won’t break ground for years without forsaking NEPA requirements? Let the fun begin.

Elephantine Mistake

by Iain Murray on January 9, 2009 · 1 comment

in Environment, International

In the 80s and 90s, Zimbabwean elephant management was a magnificent illustration of how property rights and markets combine to protect and even rescue endangered species.

Since Robert Mugabe’s government turned to racist demagoguery and violence to keep in power, the elephant has suffered tremendously as property rights and markets have been shattered. Today, it is reported that
elephants are being slaughtered for food by Mugabe’s army.

The elephant is probably one of the lesser reasons to work for the downfall of this vicious dictator, who has ruined the breadbasket of Africa. Yet if its role as a “charismatic megafauna” can help, I trust the green environmental groups will join me in calling for his overthrow and the restoration of the successful policies that allowed the elephant to thrive.

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →