Gov. Palin: Congress, it's time to stop lining your pockets

"Congress and the White House need to earn the American people's trust again."
*
Here's an excerpt from an op-ed written by Sarah Palin and published online Monday by USAToday.com:

Thanks to the solid new research and recent revelations in Peter Schweizer's book Throw Them All Out and the subsequent coverage on 60 Minutes, we have concrete proof to explain how members of Congress accumulate wealth at a rate astonishingly faster than the rest of Americans and have stock portfolios that outperform even the best hedge-fund managers'. (Full disclosure: Schweizer is employed by my political action committee as a foreign policy adviser.)

From sweetheart land deals to initial public offering (IPO) stock gifts to insider trading with non-public government information, the methods of unethical wealth accumulation for our permanent political class are endless. The reaction from the Beltway establishment to the revelations concerning insider trading among members of Congress was predictable. First they denied it, then they dismissed the problem as much ado about nothing. Some said there was no need for new laws or action because the Securities and Exchange Commission could prosecute members of Congress under existing laws against insider trading.

But under current law, there is no way the SEC will ever go after a powerful congressman or senator. The SEC never has, even though insider trading prohibitions have existed since the 1930s. Here's why: Congress sets the SEC's budget, and senators approve the head of the SEC. Congress uses its power of the purse strings to threaten federal agencies that get in their way.

For example, in 2006 the FBI got a search warrant from a federal judge to comb former congressman William Jefferson's office. The FBI already had evidence that Jefferson was taking bribes. Congress was furious that the FBI would dare search a fellow member's office. Members claimed the search was unconstitutional. They even threatened to cut the Justice Department's budget in retaliation. All this despite the fact that 86% of Americans supported the FBI raid.

A hands-off SEC

Does anyone really think the SEC under current law will have the courage to investigate the insider trading in Congress? Remember that this corruption (and failure to deal with it) encompasses both sides of the aisle. We fool ourselves thinking we can trust an agency dependent on Congress for its budget to investigate Congress.

I hate the idea of more laws, but because our politicians have shown a failure of ethical leadership, we must reassert the rule of law through strong new legislation that holds Congress accountable and prevents retaliation against whistle-blowers and regulatory agencies investigating corruption.

[More]

Read Gov. Palin's full opinion piece here. It will appear in USA Today's print edition Tuesday.

- JP

Sarah Palin: Catch 'The Undefeated' for Alaska and America’s Story

As posted on Facebook
*

Catch 'The Undefeated' for Alaska and America’s Story

Steve Bannon just released a powerful film about Alaska’s history, our rich resources, and a committed team’s successful effort to tackle political corruption. Bannon’s independently financed, produced, and directed film called “The Undefeated” is now available on cable via pay-per-view and video-on-demand. I’m thankful for Bannon’s group at Victory Films for independently putting their own time and resources into documenting the work my team in Alaska did in successfully fighting corruption and enacting real reform that put local and state government back on the side of the people. Thank you to the good Alaskans who participated in the film and spoke so passionately about our state’s history, our natural resources, and our destiny as the energy contributor for America’s security.

Bannon’s film shows how on a state and local level all citizens – no matter background or party affiliation – can come together to fight the special interests and the corrupt powers-that-be that steal power from the people. Through examples of putting government-run businesses back into the private sector hands, inviting competition, reducing taxes, and blowing the doors open to force government transparency, “The Undefeated” shows that though real reform is difficult and real reformers are vilified, it is possible. The obstacles in the way of reform are why true reform is so rare, but as the film shows, it can be done and it is worth it.

This film is not about any one person. It’s about great American values – like our indomitable optimistic pioneering spirit – that will always see America through no matter how tough times are. It’s the spirit of our Last Frontier, it’s the story of how Alaskans fought corruption and won, it’s the story of the spirit of the Tea Party Movement, and it’s the story of a people’s movement for reform. I’m grateful to these filmmakers for telling the story.

Here’s more about Steve Bannon’s film and where to view it. I encourage you to watch it. I promise you it will open some eyes.

- Sarah Palin

- JP

Cornhucksters: Ethanol Salesmen Who Would Be President

What other special interests will these guys cave to?
*
In a National Review Online op-ed earlier this month, Katrina Trinko observed that four of Sarah Palin's potential rivals for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination are stuck on ethanol:

What kind of Republican supports high tariffs on imports, dubious green tax credits, and consumption mandates to prop up unprofitable environmental darlings? The ethanol-loving midwestern kind, especially the ones running for president.

Currently, imported ethanol is slapped with a 54-cent-per-gallon tariff, while oil companies receive a 45-cent tax credit per gallon of ethanol blended into their gasoline. Both the tariff and the tax credit have just been extended for another year, thanks to a bipartisan push from Cornbelt politicians. In case these provisions aren’t enough to help the industry hobble its way to satisfying profits, lawmakers also decided to mandate that U.S. consumption of renewable fuels (which will certainly be almost entirely corn-based and cellulosic ethanol) reach 36 billion gallons by 2022. And that’s just the assistance provided on the federal level.

There are four potential midwestern 2012 Republican presidential nominees: Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, South Dakota senator John Thune, and Indiana congressman Mike Pence. When it comes to doling out favors to the ethanol industry, none of them can credibly claim his attitude was “just say no.”

Does it matter? Absolutely: As this year’s tariff and tax-credit extensions showed, even a Tea Party–driven small-government surge can’t stop politicians from kowtowing to the ethanol lobby. Further, a Republican president who is willing to carve out exemptions for ethanol interests will lack credibility when he battles spending or tax breaks benefiting other special interests. And finally, while some claim that ethanol will allow our nation to achieve energy independence, the fact that the highest approved corn-gas blend is only 15 percent ethanol (and is approved only for certain automobile models from 2007 or later) suggests that an America running on corn is unlikely in the extreme.

[More]

Mike Pence has announced that he does not intend to seek national office. But a seemingly unlikely friend of the ethanol lobby is already stalking Pence's prime location on Ethanol Alley. Newt Gingrich is a product of the southeast, not the midwest. But he is no less a snake corn oil salesman than his four counterparts in the American heartland, as a WSJ editorial, published today, reveals:

The former Speaker blew through Des Moines last Tuesday for the Renewable Fuels Association summit, and his keynote speech to the ethanol lobby was as pious a tribute to the fuel made from corn and tax dollars as we've ever heard.

[...]

Of course, the ethanol boom isn't due to the misallocation of resources that always stalks inflation. It is the result of decades of deliberate industrial policy, as Mr. Gingrich well knows. In 1998, then Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer tried to kill ethanol's subsidies for good, only to land in the wet cement that Speaker Gingrich had poured.

Yet today this now-mature industry enjoys far more than cash handouts, including tariffs on foreign competitors and a mandate to buy its product. Supporters are always inventing new reasons for these dispensations, like carbon benefits (nonexistent, according to the greens and most scientific evidence) and replacing foreign oil (imports are up). An historian of Mr. Gingrich's distinction surely knows all that.

Given that Mr. Gingrich aspires to be President, his ethanol lobbying raises larger questions about his convictions and judgment. The Georgian has been campaigning in the tea party age as a fierce critic of spending and government, but his record on that score is, well, mixed.

[More]

Do we need to blend ethanol with our gasoline? Yes, but only as a fuel oxygenate and only in very small amounts. That was the original idea when it was discovered in the previous decade that the chemical compound MTBE, which was then the oxygenate of choice, was leaking from fuel storage tanks into the groundwater. MTBE was an excellent anti-knock agent, and it was hailed as a much less toxic solution to increase the octane level of gasoline than lead, which had been used for that purpose for much of the previous century. But environmental and health concerns, the same factors that lead us to substitute MTBE in the place of lead, brought us ethanol as a replacement for MTBE.

Ethanol was first blended with gasoline at a 10 percent concentration (E10), which is much more than enough corn in the gasoline for it to serve its function as an oxygenate. But an ethanol lobby quickly coalesced around the corn product, and soon it was pushing for higher concentrations of ethanol in each gallon of gasoline. E10 will soon give way to E15, and the lobby wants to see even high blend levels, such as E-85, the so-called "flex fuel."

As a motor fuel, ethanol is not without its issues. At higher concentrations, the net lower energy of the blend becomes a factor. A vehicle will get somewhat lower fuel mileage compared to conventional 87 octane unleaded gasoline. Although many modern American cars are capable of burning E-85 with no harmful effects to the engines, this is not true for all of them, particularly older models. Many owners of small engines, used in lawn mowers, trimmers, outboard marine applications, etc. have reported severe damage from ethanol blend use, even at concentrations as low as 15 percent. And until cellulosic ethanol production become feasible, economically and otherwise, the sugar and corn we currently use will remain at higher prices than they would if the only demand for corn was for use as food.

The fact is that natural gas, coal, and oil continue to provide the most efficient use of energy defined by what it costs in dollars and energy (fuel and labor) to find, extract and refine, versus the amount of energy they provide for those dollars and energy. Of these three, the environmental lobby least favors coal and oil, although it is not very fond of any of them because they are not considered "renewable" resources. But natural gas, when used as a motor fuel, has too many advantages to be ignored. It is relatively cheap, clean-burning (Honda's CNG-powered Civic GX is greener than a Toyota Prius hybrid), and plentiful. We're living right on top of massive deposits of it, and it's not just located under a few corn-growing states. At least half of our country's states have some natural gas reserves. The Natural Gas Supply Association says those reserves are sufficient for at least 60 years at current use levels, according to its most conservative estimates. Only 56 percent of the crude oil refined in the U.S. comes from North America, but 98 percent of the natural gas we consume is produced here.

What's holding natural gas back? Nationwide, there are only about 1,500 natural-gas refueling stations for motor vehicles, and only about half of them sell to the public. California and Oklahoma lead the nation in offering the most locations where owners of CNG-fueled vehicles can "fill up." If we're to invest in our infrastructure, natural gas refueling stations will likely provide more bang for the buck than money spent in other ways.

There's another factor holding back the use of natural gas, and that is the commitment to rely on it to make the United States truly energy secure and energy independent. Of all the potential candidates for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination, only one stands alone as the leading proponent of the use of natural gas as a "bridge fuel" between gasoline and the alternative "wonder" fuels of the future, such as hydrogen. Her name is Sarah Palin.

Related: Sarah Palin, energy and the media left narrative

Update: Ed Morrissey comments:

We have an opportunity to reform government, perhaps the greatest such political opening in almost a century. Farm subsidies in general have to be on the table, but that’s especially true for ethanol and corn in particular. Ethanol has simply proven to be too costly, too difficult to transport, and not an effective enough substitute for gasoline to be practical or cost-effective. Subsidies only hide that fact from consumers at the gas pumps and the showrooms, but the cost to taxpayers for the years of subsidies demonstrate the decades-long failure. Even Al Gore admits ethanol is a bust, for Pete’s sake.

Republicans don’t need a presidential candidate who wants to conduct business as usual by buying farm votes with promises of our money. We need a candidate who recognizes the historical moment for change, rather than the opportunity to sell more of the same.

- JP