The EPA, Not Carbon Dioxide, Is Hazardous To The Public
NPCA Expert Says EPA Shouldn't Control Greenhouse Gases until Congress Passes Bill on the Specific Issue
Dallas (December 8, 2009) - The EPA's announcement yesterday declaring carbon dioxide a hazard and a danger to public health is the administration's attempt at extortion, according to NCPA Senior Fellow, H. Sterling Burnett. President Obama is telling Congress to act soon or he will, and they won't like the result, he said.
"The administration and the Democratic leadership is basically saying that this bad climate bill will need to be passed or they will enact, purely through regulation, even worse carbon controls on the economy," Burnett said. "This is truly a choice between two evils."
The EPA is considering rules that would restrict emissions from large sources of CO2 such as power stations, chemical plants and refineries. The EPA also has the option to regulate other emitters such as trucks, lawnmowers, airplanes, and large buildings.
"Congress should act to suspend the EPA's rule making authority over CO2 by halting any EPA action on greenhouse gases unless and until Congress passes a bill specifically dealing with this problem," Burnett said. "But, neither the Democratic leadership nor the administration would allow this because it takes away their leverage in negotiating the cap and trade bill."
To read Sterling Burnett's testimony on this topic, log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/031209_WM_Burnett.pdf.
The EPA, Not Carbon Dioxide, Is Hazardous To The Public
Labels: carbon credit , carbon footprint , Climate change , Environmental
Climate-gate
Obama Administration Underestimates Severity of Climate-gate
NCPA: This is a bad time to make hasty decisions about climate change, need to reevaluate science
Dallas (December 7, 2009) - The Climate-gate scandal, which revealed that scientists attempted to suppress inconvenient data, used tricks to change reported outcomes, suppress dissent, and undermine the peer review process, should serve as a major red flag to the Obama administration and other government delegations, according to NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett."Even though the science used to justify the need for a costly climate treaty is unraveling, the Obama administration is shrugging off the emails, parroting the claim that the science is settled and it's time to act, which couldn't be further from the truth," Dr. Burnett said. "Instead of the administration choosing to slow down and make sure the science is solid, it feels the need to push harder for an agreement to set new greenhouse gas emissions targets."
Supporters within the Obama administration who support moving forward with a climate treaty are underplaying the importance of scientific data and the critical nature that this small group of scientists has played in shaping public perception of the causes and consequences of global warming, Burnett said.
"With literally trillions of dollars at stake, now is not the time to take dramatic action just for the administration to say that they are 'doing something' about global warming," Burnett said. "Rather, we should get the science right, then determine if we need to do anything at all. Surely we can come up with a solution better than the cap-and-trade scam currently dominating the policy discussion."
Burnett has developed several sensible ideas to effectively address global warming. To see the list of "no regrets" policies, log on to http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st321.
Labels: carbon credit , carbon footprint , Climate change , Environmental
New Underground Economy
New Underground Economy
by Richard W. Rahn
The underground or "black" economy is rapidly rising, and the fault is mainly due to government policies.
Here is the evidence. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) released a report last week concluding that 7.7 percent of U.S. households, containing at least 17 million adults, are unbanked (i.e. those who do not have bank accounts), and an "estimated 17.9 percent of U.S. households, roughly 21 million, are underbanked" (i.e., those who rely heavily on nonbank institutions, such as check cashing and money transmitting services). As an economy becomes richer and incomes rise, the normal expectation is that the proportion of the unbanked population falls and does not rise as is now happening in the United States.
Tax revenues are falling far more rapidly at the federal, state and local level than would be expected by the small drop in real gross domestic product (GDP) and changes in tax law that have occurred since the recession began. The currency in circulation outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve banks and the vaults of depository institutions - that is, the currency held by individuals and businesses - has grown by 13.3 percent in the last two years, while real nominal (not inflation-adjusted) GDP has not grown at all, and real (inflation-adjusted) GDP incomes have fallen by more than 3 percent. With the growth of electronic means of payment and financial service providers, it would be expected that the currency component of GDP would fall, not rise.
The underground economy refers to both legal activities, such as often found in construction and services industries where taxes are not withheld and paid, and illegal activities, such as drug dealing and prostitution.
Countries such as the United States, Switzerland and Japan historically have had relatively small, nonreporting and/or illegal sectors, a typical estimate being 13 percent of GDP.
Most European countries have had somewhat larger underground sectors (typically 20 percent or so) in part because of the desire to escape higher tax rates. Italy and some of the other Southern European countries are believed to have underground sectors that account for 30 percent or more of all economic activity.
I recall an Italian finance minister telling a few of us at a meeting a couple of decades ago that, for policy purposes, he assumed that "the economy was 40 percent larger than what was reported." In some developing countries and/or highly corrupt countries, underground or "off the books" activities are estimated to be as high as 70 percent of all economic activity.
The FDIC report about the size of the unbanked or underbanked sector in the U.S. should be of concern because those who do not use the banking system often have to pay higher fees to cash checks, pay bills (e.g., money orders, etc.), or transmit funds.
People who keep their savings in cash at home rather than in banks make themselves easier prey for criminals and are more likely to lose their money to fire, flood, or just neglect. Not surprisingly, a majority (71 percent) of the unbanked have household incomes of less than $30,000 per year.
There are many reasons people do not have bank accounts. Banks, because of the "know your customer" and other anti-money laundering regulations, make it difficult for nonestablished people, such as the young and transient, as well as legal and illegal immigrants, to open bank accounts.
Also, many of these same regulations are responsible for the rise in bank fees, which are a particular burden for low-income people. You can be sure that every time Congress passes some new law or the IRS implements some new regulation to "get tax cheats," much of the real burden of these compliance costs will fall on those least able to afford it, while those intent on finding their way around it will do so.
People also avoid having bank accounts because they are vulnerable to asset seizure, judgments, levies, etc. Increasingly, bankers and others who provide financial services are forced by governments to spy and snitch on their own customers, and this is a real turnoff for many people, which causes them to find other ways of maintaining financial privacy.
Many studies have shown that when people believe the taxes they are required to pay are reasonable and the political leaders tend to spend their tax dollars wisely, tax compliance rises, and vice versa. In the United States, there is increased evidence that many tax dollars are not being spent wisely and are often used to pay off political cronies.
Over the past year in particular, the public has become aware that many in Washington who advocate higher taxes and argue that everyone has a responsibility to pay taxes are themselves not complying with the tax laws and regulations.
When you have a secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee (the tax writing committee) accused of cheating on their taxes, it greatly undermines the moral authority of the tax collectors, making the common citizens feel like chumps and, hence, much more willing to try to legally avoid or illegally evade taxes themselves.
The evidence is unambiguous; governments cannot increase tax compliance and decrease the size of the underground economy by ever increasing and more onerous regulations.
It is no accident that those governments that allow their citizens a high degree of personal and financial liberty, including financial privacy, and spend taxpayer dollars wisely, honestly and competently, have much smaller underground sectors than corrupt and oppressive governments. Washington, take note.
National Recovery Act- 1934
This came out of the History column from todays local paper the Gazelle.
"Careful search of National Recovery Act codes reveals little of value
in them to any industry except those monopolistic
privileges which are incompatible with a capitalistic system based on
free enterprise and which ought never to have been granted unless it
were contemplated to make a transition from free competitive capitalism
to state capitalism."
Dr. Charles Roos, former director of research for the national recovery act.
Assailing the Recovery administration, minced no words in an almost
unqualified attack on the code system, Dr. Roos called the NRA "the
greatest hoax ever perpetrated on industry or labor."
Reminds me of todays recovery "stimulus package"
American Jury Institute
Most Americans believe that their liberties are safe in courtrooms; that courts will uphold and support their rights. Sadly, in Colorado Springs the opposite is true. This isn’t about jury tampering — it’s about something far worse. It’s about a government bent on suppressing the rights of the people instead of protecting them.
Here are the relevant facts: A man was peacefully handing out leaflets on the sidewalk outside the Colorado Springs Municipal Court building on Kiowa Street. Anyone who received a flyer had it forcefully confiscated, and then the entire jury pool was dismissed for fear of being “tainted.” The judge responsible for the court’s harsh response is The Hon. Spencer Gresham, who then went on to order that no one be allowed to hand out leaflets within 100 yards of the courthouse.
So, what was in the flyers that brought forth such an extreme response by the court? They were “True or False” flyers, designed by the American Jury Institute. They explained that when you sit on a jury, you may use your conscience in determining a verdict. They are not specific to any one case, but apply to all criminal trials anywhere in America.
The flyers discuss “jury nullification,” also known as “jury veto power,” which has been the traditional right of jurors since our nation was founded. Here are some relevant quotes:
“I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” — Thomas Jefferson
“Jurors should acquit even against the judges’ instruction… if exercising their judgment with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.” — Alexander Hamilton
“The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the fact in controversy.” — John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States.
“It is not only his [the juror’s] right, but his duty… to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though indirect opposition to the direction of the court.” — John Adams, second U.S. President
Jury nullification is an old and vitally important right for all Americans. It is our last peaceful line of defense against a corrupt and power-hungry government. It enables us to defend our fellow citizens from unconstitutional and unjust laws, by exonerating people who stand accused of violating them.
Sadly, many judges in the Colorado Springs Municipal Court hate this right, and Judge Gresham is abusing his power to suppress our rights. This isn’t just about jury nullification. It’s also about our First Amendment right to inform our fellow Coloradans about their power as jurors. Judge Gresham knows that the U.S. Supreme Court decision in UNITED STATES v. GRACE, 461 U.S. 171 (1983), protects our right to hand out flyers on sidewalks outside government buildings. Grace held that: “ …they [sidewalks] …are public forums for First Amendment purposes,” and “…the public sidewalks surrounding the Court grounds are no different than other public sidewalks in the city.”
In spite of this, Gresham is denying this right to the people of Colorado Springs. It should serve as grounds for his removal from the bench.
During a recent motions hearing, Doug Bruce asked for some water. Judge Gresham said he had no water, and he offered Bruce an empty cup. How perfectly symbolic: A cup devoid of water in a courtroom devoid of liberty.
If you are disgusted by Gresham’s lawless actions, write to: Mayor & City Council, PO Box 1575, CS CO 80901, or submit an online complaint at https://secure.springsgov.com/crm/crm.asp, or call a City Council member and lodge a complaint against Judge Spencer Gresham.
—
Alexander Daube is an Area Coordinator for the American Jury Institute, www.FIJA.org. Readers may contact him by e-mailing: patriot1701@yahoo.com
Labels: ACLU , Constitution , Court , law , newspaper , quote , society , Supreme Court
.JPG)