Democrat Keystone Cops look to retroactively raise oil companies’ liability caps

by Rossputin | 5:49 am, May 13, 2010

In just the latest example of government-by-overreaction, the Obama Administration and their mindless Democrat allies in Congress are looking to pass legislation raising the liability caps for oil companies involved in “catastrophic” evenets from $75 million to an as-yet-undetermined number, with some rumors of a new cap of $10 billion.

There is currently a 8-cent per barrel tax collected by the federal government which goes into a fund to cover potential future damages.

I understand the intent of a liability cap, including allowing smaller oil companies to be able to get affordable insurance, but I have to say that a $75 million cap seems small and represents little more than corporate welfare, redistributing potential liability from multi-million or multi-billion dollar companies to taxpayers to the extent that an event depletes the fund. Particularly during these days of $80/barrel oil.

The Hill reports that small oil companies would rather see an increase in this tax to then increase the size of the clean-up fund rather than a massive increase in the liability cap.

Even if this plan makes sense, Democrats in DC are likely to ignore it because it doesn’t appear aggressive enough and heaven knows they always want to be seen as “doing something.”

But the biggest problem with the rumored proposal is that it would apply retroactively to BP for the ongoing Gulf of Mexico oil spill. I’m not here to defend BP in any way, but changing the rules of the game because politicians don’t like how the game is going is unjust.

I’m not a lawyer, but let me clarify one point here:

Many people are writing about the retroactive change in liability as being an ex post facto law. That is actually not clear because the Supreme Court has ruled at least once that ex post facto impermissibility relates primarily to making something a crime which was not a crime when it was committed. The application of the concept of ex post facto to civil law and liability is still unclear, although the idea of “punitive intent” has crept into Supreme Court discussion of the issue. This means that if a case like this got to the Court, the decision might hang on whether it is determined that the increased liability is effectively punishment of BP.

To the extent that the government will argue (and not entirely unreasonably) that the purpose of the measure is simply to recover costs and not to punish, there is a strong chance the retroactive change would be upheld by the Court. Furthermore, the fact that the increased liability probably doesn’t mean the oil companies will have an even greater incentive to avoid oil spills (because how is an oil company going to argue that they don’t already avoid spills to the greatest possible extent?) also argues against the measure being defined as punitive.

But that doesn’t make changing the rules retroactively OK. It shows a government of reactive vindictive populists, a rule of men rather than of law, and a tendency to behave in ways which we should expect from Hugo Chavez, not the US Congress.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

‘Lobatomy’ v State of Colorado

by Amy Oliver | 5:48 am, May 13, 2010

I can’t take credit for the title. It comes from Poudre School Board member Patrick Albright who, along with fellow Director Barbara Schwerin, had the courage to stand up against the prevailing majority that voted to use taxpayer money to fund Lobato v. Colorado, a class action lawsuit to sue taxpayers for more K-12 funding.
In an [...]

Medicare & the government debt ball & chain

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, May 13, 2010

Mothers Against Debt has a memorable video on how the U.S. government’s debt shackles future generations:

The health control legislation (HR 3590) will also increase the deficit. Here’s a chart from the recent article by Veronique de Rugy in Reason magazine, Our Unsustainable Debt:

The National Debt and My Children

by Ben DeGrow | 10:54 pm, May 12, 2010

A quick video with an important message — one that’s hard-hitting for this father of young children — brought to you by the growing grassroots group Mothers Against Debt. Check it out:

Colorado Secretary of State’s Office Responds to Colorado Ethics Watch Complaint, Slams CEW Director Toro as “Disingenuous”

by CTBC Director | 10:10 pm, May 12, 2010

Despite the best efforts of the “progressive” spin machine (aided and abetted by pretend news organization the “Colorado Independent”), developments in the spurious “campaign finance complaint” by notorious leftist attack yap dogs “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) against the grassroots judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado continue to blow up in [...]

Questioning your “compassionate” politics

by Brian T. Schwartz | 9:51 pm, May 12, 2010

My first article/post for the Huffington Post appeared today. It begins: “You oppose Medicaid and government-run schools? You’re heartless and lack compassion.” If you have ever made this accusation, even tacitly, I invite you to reconsider the government policies you support. Why does being compassionate mean supporting government-run schools and health plans? This makes little [...]

Sine Die Open Thread–Winners and Losers?

by elpresidente | 7:51 pm, May 12, 2010

The end of the 2010 session of the Colorado legislature is upon us. Kelly Maher of WhoSaidYouSaid says it’s time to assess the damage. Brad Jones of the newly relaunched Face the State has links to FTS 2008 and 2009 session wrap-ups and asks “When ProgressNow disses the GOP, does it matter?” The legislature is [...]

The legislative session is over. Time to assess the damage . . .

by Kelly Maher | 6:45 pm, May 12, 2010

We just received an email from Bobby Clark, executive director of ProgressNow Colorado, in which he names this legislative session’s “Winners and Losers.” Clark names state Rep. Max Tyler, D-Lakewood, a winner saying:Rep. Max Tyler has quickly establis…

Don’t Be Like California (Or Greece)

by Mike Krause | 4:11 pm, May 12, 2010

Writing about the fairly frightening similarities between Greece and California over at Reason Online, Tim Cavanaugh asks, “What do Europe’s most bankrupt nation-state and America’s most bankrupt united state have in common, aside from being bankrupt?”
Good question. Cavanaugh continues:
…it turns out that Greece, that sun-drenched paradise on the Aegean, and California, that sun-warmed [...]

Who says they’re “Progressive”?

by Al Maurer | 12:00 pm, May 12, 2010

Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan made a speech about American exceptionalism to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs in Oklahoma City on March 31, 2010. You can read the speech on Real Clear Politics. It is worth reading because it summarizes the massive mismanagement of the government by these spendthrift socialists. One has to wonder how [...]

Oklahoma: Where School Choice Comes Sweeping Down the Plain?

by Eddie | 11:13 am, May 12, 2010

My Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow is also a contributing editor and regular writer for the national publication School Reform News. His latest takes a look at some heartening developments from the Sooner State:

A trio of school choice bills has accelerated Oklahoma’s progress toward expanding educational options for state students.
With strong official backing from [...]

Mixed feelings about Audit the Fed

by Rossputin | 6:34 am, May 12, 2010

Yesterday, the Senate unanimously passed a measure (a modified amendment by socialist Bernie Sanders) requiring a one-time audit of the Federal Reserve, in particular to whom it gave over $2 trillion in “emergency loans” between December 2007 and now. They also defeated a measure by Republican David Vitter which would have allowed occasional “sweeping audits”.

I realize that a lot of people on “my” side of politics are all for the “Audit the Fed” movement. But something about it just rubs me the wrong way.

And that something is the politicization of the Fed.

Yes, it’s absolutely true that the Fed has become more political than it should…and that’s not just a recent development. It was political under Paul Volcker and under Alan Greenspan, and it’s reached a whole new level under Ben Bernanke.

I’m not saying the recent hyper-politicization of the Fed is not understandable given the massive economic upheaval the country has experienced.

And I most certainly am not saying that taxpayers don’t have some sort of right to know where their money is being spent or lent.

But ongoing audits of the Fed will introduce a level of Congressional influence and interference which is the last thing a central bank needs and the last thing American citizens need despite “conservative populist” rhetoric to the contrary.

Remember, there are probably not more than half a dozen members of Congress truly qualified to ask questions of the Fed and understand the answers. After Paul Ryan, I have a hard time thinking of any, actually, but I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt. Ron Paul is probably qualified, but he’s also a bit wacky…and I say that as someone who contributed to his presidential campaign (but wouldn’t vote for him because he’s so out-in-left-field on international issues.)

Members of Congress NEVER want interest rates to go up. While it’s fairly obvious from the Fed’s reluctance to change, especially increase, rates during the months leading up to a presidential election, I repeat that the last thing we need is some House committee chairman hinting to some Fed governor that some appropriation or project for the governor’s region might not be looked upon favorably if the Fed were to raise rates.

All in all, I think it would be better to abolish the Fed than to subject it, and therefore the nation’s monetary policy, to the political whims of the self-serving narcissists in the US Senate or the wild political swings to which the American public has been prone in recent years.

So, for the first and hopefully the last time in my life, I’m pleased that Bernie Sanders beat out David Vitter. If there is a God and if he cares about politics, may he forgive me for saying such a thing…

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

How to encourage women to stop blindly voting for Democrats

by Rossputin | 5:29 am, May 12, 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZOBPZctAg4

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

ObamaCare harms low-skilled & part-time workers

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, May 12, 2010

The health control legislation known as ObamaCare (HR 3590) has an employer mandate provision for those who hire more than 50 people, as I’ve written before, this is a terrible idea. Diana Furchtgott-Roth of the Manhatten Institute explains how the employer mandate harms low-skilled and part-time workers:
…come 2014, the new health care bill will [...]

Scott Brown, Big Government Republicans, third parties and “winning”

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 10:41 pm, May 11, 2010

Scott Brown is a great example of the lunacy of our two party system.

Brown is the newest GOP hero for winning Ted Kennedy’s senate seat. He was nigh on canonized by Republicans for his victory.

Those of us when some sense of perspective realized Brown was a major player in the socialization of Massachusetts health care and did not join in on the canonization.

As a U.S. Senator, he voted for Obama’s Keynesian “jobs bill.” As of tonight, he has now voted against the “Audit the Fed” bill. You are what your record says you are.

The newest GOP poster boy has demonstrated that he is just another Big Government Republican Statist. He fits right in with the last GOP nominee for President, John McCain. He fits right in with the last GOP governor of Colorado, Ref C cheerleader Bill Owens.

I know, I know, my Republican friends will retort, “but Brown is so much better than any Democrat!”

So?

Driving into a tree at 90 miles per hour is better than running into a tree at 100 miles per hour. The result is the same. There certainly is no sense in cheering the 90 mph collision. There is less sense in hoping for it. There is even less sense in actively praising it.

Our two party duopoly makes otherwise intelligent small-government minded people praise the likes of Scott Brown. It is an absurdity.

My good GOP friends will say that Libertarians have no chance of winning, so they must vote for Republicans, regardless of how statist the Republican is. This is an interesting play on words. Their definition of “winning” includes “losing.” For example, Republicans could have “won” the election if McCain defeated Obama. Of course, this “victory” would have been a huge defeat for freedom.

Hence, some Republicans define “winning” to include “losing.” It’s a neat trick.

Regarding the compulsive desire for Republicans to “win,” Michael Bednarik had a great analogy. He said:

If you were in prison and faced a 50% chance of death by lethal injection, a 45% chance of the electric chair, and a 5% chance of escape, would you vote for lethal injection because it meant you where more likely to win?

Winning an election means nothing if it includes losing your principles. Now, I know lots of principled Republicans, including my dad. They exist in no small number. But that number is insufficient to actually elect a significant number of small government candidates under the GOP banner. The GOP is what its record says it is.

A third way, however, is not impossible. Notwithstanding significant differences in the voting system, the recent UK elections have demonstrated it.

While I have no praise for the policies of the United Kingdom’s Liberal Democrats, I have tremendous praise for their success as a third party in their most recent national election.

Nick Clegg, the LibDems’ leader, did not work within the Labour Party to make change. His principles did not allow it. For that, I admire him and all those Britons that voted for the third party. To quote El Presidente, “supporting party before principle does a disservice to both.”

Bob Beauprez Backs Lang Sias, Raises Questions about Relevance, Judgment

by Ben DeGrow | 10:06 pm, May 11, 2010

In one of Colorado’s most head-scratching political moves of the year, former GOP Congressman and wildly unsuccessful 2006 gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez announced his endorsement of 7th Congressional candidate and Republican newcomer Lang Sias. The first reaction I and many of my politically aware friends had pretty much boiled down to: Huh???
When Tom Tancredo and [...]

‘Lead balloon’ flies through Senate

by Amy Oliver | 4:11 pm, May 11, 2010

Colorado News Agency reports good news for taxpayers and bad news for state employees who used state vehicles for personal commuting. According to CNA:
Senate lawmakers drove home the point today that state employees using state owned vehicles should reimburse the government anytime the vehicle is driven for personal use.
The measure under consideration would delineate between [...]

Shining a light on national debt

by Amy Oliver | 3:46 pm, May 11, 2010

Mothers Against Debt (MAD), a new project from Transparency Czarina Amy Oliver Cooke, just release a video that illustrates the reality of what our national debt is doing to our children. At COST we like promote our motto: No taxation without information. Perhaps our children should promote the original motto: No taxation without representation. After [...]

Hickenlooper’s “First Class” rail plans – with your money

by Mary Smith | 3:46 pm, May 11, 2010

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper helped sell metro Denver on a 122-mile commuter rail and light rail system that is now more than $2 billion in the hole. But that hasn’t dimmed his ardor for Coloradans riding the rails – or his desire to spend other peo…

A Message from Mothers Against Debt (MAD)

by Jon Caldara | 2:22 pm, May 11, 2010

From Transparency Czarina Amy Oliver,

This what we have done to our children with our reckless spending and massive national debt. Sadly this video is already out of date. Since this video was made, our national debt has climbed another $1700.

Please share this wonderful, but frightening video with as many people as you know. It’s [...]

School District 38 News

by Al Maurer | 12:55 pm, May 11, 2010

Interested parents and taxpayers have started a blog site for unofficial news about Lewis-Palmer District 38 in northern El Paso County. There is a link under “Grassroots” on the right. These days the American people are getting serious about holding their elected officials accountable: some officials and parties talk about accountability–here’s an open forum for [...]

Is Elena Kagan Obama’s Harriet Miers?

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 11:48 am, May 11, 2010

After President Bush nominated his good friend Harriet Miers, a strong administrator and legal industry politician but not a legal scholar for the U.S. Supreme Court, she was soundly denounced by conservative legal scholars and forced to ask the president to withdraw her nomination.
Now President Obama has appointed his close friend Elena Kagan to the Court. She shares his proclivity for avoiding accountability, writing few law journal articles and prefering politics to the law.
Despite all of the White House and Ivy League spin about Kagan’s brilliance, there is no evidence that she is brilliant, a scholar or any more qualified than Miers to sit on the court. Like Miers and Obama, Kagan apparently decided that she doesn’t like to do real legal work. Reading and writing briefs can be boring, as many law school graduates have learned much too late, and negotiating deals for clients is not as much fun for some lawyers as being an academic and legal industry politician and bureaucrat.
While people without prior experience as judges have sat on the court, they at least practiced law for more than two years and wrote more than three or four law journal articles before being appointed to the court.
Obama says he’s appointing Kagan because she’s a good negotiator and consensus builder, if not a legal scholar.
Is Obama also trying to appease American Jews who he’s deeply offended because of his anti-Israel policy. If confirmed, Kagan would be the court’s third Jew and third woman.
Is he trying to appease the gay community, which he’s also turned off because he hasn’t gone to the mat for them so far. Kagan has a long history as a gay rights advocate. (I also consider myself a gay rights advocate.) She tried to keep military recruiters from the Harvard Law School halls while she was the dean there because of the military’s don’t ask don’t tell policy on gays. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled against her and other law schools.
Kagan has the support of a number of conservative legal scholars because she treated them well at Harvard. While she appears headed for rough confirmation hearings, she should win confirmation with a few votes to spare. She is a poor appointment, but Obama has a record of appointing weak talents, and this one is no different.
Will Republican senators use Kagan’s confirmation hearings to educate the public about the importance of putting highly qualified judges on the court as Bush did? Hope so.

Colorado GOP candidates won’t get much funding from Michael Steele’s RNC

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 11:15 am, May 11, 2010

When we get fundraising letters from Michael Steele’s Republican National Committee, I trash them because I figure the money will be wasted and spent on candidates I don’t really support. Apparently a lot of potential contributors feel the same way, after watching all of the drama at the RNC over how Steele and his staff have been living high on other people’s money.
Because of the RNC’s financial and PR problems, Steele has fired his finance director and other managers. But he’s been the real problem, because he hasn’t been paying attention to details while making big fees giving speeches around the country. Unfortunately, the RNC can’t dump him because he has the votes to keep his job through next fall’s elections, and, perhaps, beyond. He’s a great entertainer and a lousy executive.
What this means for Colorado Republican candidates, many of whom are having their own fundraising problems, is that they have to work harder on fundraising. Steele won’t be able to help them very much.
Studies show that money doesn’t determine winners in political campaigns when the candidates have pretty similar name recognition. But, as I’ve pointed out before, no candidate who came into the election year with poor fundraising results has won a statewide election in Colorado, according to the GOP’s chairman, Dick Wadhams. A candidate doesn’t have to be the biggest spender to win an election, but if that candidate is too lazy and ineffective to raise the money needed for a strong campaign, the stronger fundraiser and harder worker will win the contest.
Having said all of that, it seems that what Colorado Republicans need to see is that their leading candidates are stepping up their fundraising and that they will be competitive in the fall. If contributors don’t see better results, they’ll keep their wallets closed despite the opportunities to win some big elections this year.

Another Great Education Reform Movie Coming Soon: Waiting for Superman

by Eddie | 10:20 am, May 11, 2010

I know it’s only Tuesday, but I can’t help but thinking about movies again. Last week was the Denver event co-hosted by my Independence Institute friends. About 50 guests showed up to watch The Cartel and have a great discussion about education reform afterward. I couldn’t go because it was past my bedtime. And my [...]

May 17th Happy Hour Meetup Featuring…

by redrocks | 9:59 am, May 11, 2010

State Senator Shawn Mitchell – Up On The Roof!

2010 State Legislative Wrap Up & Sine Die Celebration

So far, Colorado State Senator Shawn Mitchell will be our special guest to catch us up on the good, the bad, and the ugly happenings this past legislative session (we’ve asked some D’s but haven’t found a match yet). [...]

Life on Hold for the Folks of Tennessee

by Mr. Bob | 9:08 am, May 11, 2010

#tcot #USNAVY #flooding #Tennessee
The media just isn’t covering this very much. 29 people died and thousands lost everyting they own. 1 Billion in damage.

The Folks at Naval Station Millington TN support the entire active and reserve components of the US Navy and is one of the largest single business activities in the State of Tennesee.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/millington.htm

Last week they had 11 inches of rain in about a day and the levee broke. There are a lot of good Youtube Videos of folks going through it. Here is one. Many people lost everything including houses and cars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk8hiKKPvfc

The flood deluged the Navy base including housing, took ALL systems offline flooding a large majority of the buildings. However, due to excellent disaster recovery plans and good decision making prior to the flooding they won’t be down long.

One of the main problems that still remains is cleanup, many workers have not been back to work because of housing issues. FEMA is helping the thousands of flood victims.

Some systems are already coming back online, bulidings with damage are the main problem now, and as soon as those are available and workers can get back to the office, systems will most likely be restored fully. BRAVO ZULU to the Sailors, Marines and civilians out there for their Herculean effort to come back from a disaster of Biblical proportions.

They immediately put up a Facebook page (PERS-43) and are keeping the fleet informed as to their progress.

The selection boards scheduled for May/June look like they won’t be delayed long if at all. Those of us waiting to find out if we’ve been promoted are thankful for that.

Bravo Zulu again.

Will it be Charlie Specter or Arlen Crist?

by Rossputin | 6:18 am, May 11, 2010

A Rasmussen Reports poll released yesterday shows Congressman Joe Sestak ahead of incumbent former Republican Senator Arlen Specter by 5 percent among Pennsylvania Democrat likely voters.

Just as Florida Governor Charlie Crist tipped his hand that he was going to run as an independent by vetoing a widely popular (except with teachers’ unions) public school teacher tenure reform bill, Arlen Specter gave a hint two weeks ago that he was not married to his new political party when he said “But I have thought from time to time that I might have helped the country more if I’d stayed a Republican.” (Let’s be clear about this: It’s not because he’s rethinking his leftist views but rather that he thinks he might have convinced more Republicans to kill their own political careers by voting with him if he’d stayed in the GOP.)

Specter, like Crist, has an ego that could fill his local stadium. It’s all about them, all about how so very much they still have “to offer”.

At this point, I think it’s fairly likely that Specter will announce an independent run, giving the usual platitudes about how “the parties left me, I didn’t leave them”. But Specter will have even a lower chance of winning than Crist has.

Crist is trading around a 1/3 chance of winning on Intrade.com. I think it’s too high, though one can theorize a way he can win if enough Democrats vote for him in Florida. I continue to believe that Democrats will vote for Democrats and Republicans are disgusted with Crist and will vote for Rubio. Furthermore, I believe that Democrat turnout will be relatively low.

In Pennsylvania, I think Specter will take votes from Sestak but not from Toomey if he runs as an independent. If anything, I’d think a Specter independent campaign dramatically increases the odds of a Toomey victory. I have a couple orders in on Intrade right now to sell a Democrat victory and buy an independent victory. Not that I think Specter can win, but I think the value of that contract will jump if he announces a run, so I’ll try to buy it cheap now and then sell if it he announces.

In any case, I think that other than the hair, we’ll soon have a hard time telling Arlen Crist from Charlie Specter. And perhaps we don’t need to as we should just say “good riddance” to both.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Are American Jews finally waking up to Obama not being a friend?

by Rossputin | 5:00 am, May 11, 2010

I’ve written several times in recent years how remarkable the Jewish loyalty to the Democratic Party has been, especially with consistent, if uneven, evidence since Jimmy Carter’s presidency that the Democrats are far more pro-Palestinian (and occasionally anti-Israel) than the Republicans are.

Furthermore, the home of anti-Semitism in the US Congress is the Congressional Black Caucus – Democrats all.

Maybe the dam is beginning to crack with a new poll showing that by a 46% to 42% margin Jewish voters said they would consider voting for someone other than Barack Obama versus voting for him in the next election. (Actually the poll results were released in April but it’s just getting media coverage now…)

Not surprisingly, degree of religious orthdoxy correlated highly with support (or lack of support, more precisely) for Obama. Orthodox Jews were almost 4 times as likely to say they would not support Obama as to support him. Conservative Jews (less religious than Orthodox) were 50% against Obama to 38% for him, and “among Reform Jews (the least religious category), a slim majority of 52% still supported Obama while 36% indicated they would consider someone else.”

Also, people who have been to Israel or have family there were much less likely to support Obama than those who haven’t and don’t.

When asked whether Palestinians would live peacefully with Israel if they had their own state, only 19% said yes. Another 19% didn’t know or didn’t answer, and 62% said the Palestinians would continue to try to destroy Israel.

It’s about time that Jews start recognizing that this is not the 1950s of white-shoed Republican WASPs keeping them (us) out of country clubs. When it comes to fighting for the survival of democracies and understanding the importance that Israel has to America, any Jew who thinks that Democrats are the better choice is simply being irrational.

It’s hard to say that Jews are known for making stupid decisions, thus it’s been hard for me to watch so many Jews be so stupid for so long, including voting by 78% to 21% for Barack Obama in 2008. I’m very glad that the behavior of this Administration is waking up Jews along with the rest of the electorate. Better late than never.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Large employers may drop coverage, pay penalty

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, May 11, 2010

Will the health control legislation (HR 3590) encourage large firms to stop offering medical insurance? From CNNMoney.com (Fortune):
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill’s critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the [...]

Former Colorado Supreme Court justice (and current full-time activist) Jean Dubofsky & Democrat Party lawyer Mark Grueskin roll out the big bucks to counter Clear The Bench Colorado

by CTBC Director | 9:11 pm, May 10, 2010

Coming close on the heels of a spurious “campaign finance complaint” by notorious leftist attack yap dogs “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do) against the grassroots judicial accountability organization Clear The Bench Colorado, the announcement this weekend (at the Colorado Bar Association board of governors meeting) of a well-funded group formed [...]

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

Follow PPC

Search

WayIn

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Advertise Here!

Categories

Archives

Meta

Blogroll

Contributors