The Metaphysics and Some Politics of Global Warming
Regarding Bret Stephens's "Global Warming as Mass Neurosis" (Global View, July 1): In 1992, at my 25th Harvard College reunion, we got an accurate forecast of the "ideological convenience" driving global warming alarmism. In a discussion of the Rio Summit on environment and development, one of my classmates effused, "Who would have thought that the environment would bring us world government?" In other words, the advent of world-wide "pollution" controls will lead to world government (which all of us statist Harvard grads eagerly await).
On the other hand, climatologist Patrick Michaels has noted that we merely need to "follow the money" to explain global warming enthusiasm among scientists and academicians: Huge amounts of taxpayer dollars are running down the drain of climate research, and the people raking in the bucks are the same ones spouting the global warming nonsense.
--Grant W. Schaumburg Jr.
Boston
Labels: climate, corruption, earmarks, environment as religion, global warming, media bias, taxes
Late last week, Gallup published its annual survey of public confidence in U.S. institutions.
At the top, with an impressive combined "great" or "a lot" approval of 71% sits the military, described since 2003 as presiding over a "failure" in Iraq.
At the bottom of the heap, displacing HMOs as our worst institution, one finds the second branch of government, our Congress, at 12%. The Gallup folks noted it is "the worst rating Gallup has measured for any institution in the 35-year history of this question." Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, come on down! You've made history.
-- Dan Henninger
Labels: Congress, corruption, democrats, earmarks, Iraq, military, Petraeus
"People say all the time: 'We can't pick winners and losers.' Well then fine. Take every single dollar of subsidy out of the federal tax code. Get rid of it all. . . . Let's have a real level playing field where nobody gets a penny in subsidy."
– Hillary Clinton, quoted in USA Today, April 5, 2008
Now, there's a capital idea – and just in time for April 15. The simplest, fairest and most economically efficient tax code would end all special interest tax advantages and flatten tax rates. Except Mrs. Clinton was ridiculing this idea. She went on to say that if subsidies vanish from the tax code, we'd "hear the squeals of protest from Wall Street to Houston to Silicon Valley."
Her philosophy certainly fits with that of the current Congress, which is becoming a tax loophole production factory for the powerful. Exhibit A is the "Foreclosure Prevention Act," which passed the Senate last week and contains $25 billion in tax subsidies for home builders and industry interests hurt by the housing crunch. Builders will be able to offset current losses against taxes paid in the past three years, which will mean billions of dollars of tax rebate checks from Uncle Sam.
This giveaway came only a few weeks after the National Association of Home Builders threatened to suspend their PAC contributions to Congress "until further notice" – meaning until they saw more return on their political investments. Congratulations.
That gambit paid off big time. Other winners include the large Wall Street banks that have lost money in the subprime mortgage meltdown, including Citigroup, Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley, which also qualify for rebates to offset current losses.
Republican Johnny Isakson of Georgia won Senate passage of a $7,000 tax credit for those who buy foreclosed properties. This won't prevent foreclosures or make these properties more affordable. Instead it will only prop up the sales price of the inventory of abandoned homes that the banks now own. Meanwhile, the House bill contains a $7,500 tax credit for first-time middle-income home buyers. The powerful Realtors' lobby and mortgage banks that own foreclosed properties blazed the money trail across Capitol Hill to get that one passed.
Oh, and while they were at it, the Senators voted 88-8 to add $6 billion in tax deductions for renewable energy producers. (If you wonder what this has to do with the mortgage "crisis," you just arrived off the turnip truck.) This industry is already teed up to get nearly $10 billion in tax breaks in the energy bill, including subsidies for wind and solar power producers, hybrid vehicles and biodiesel. Much of this social engineering comes from the same people on Capitol Hill who insist that taxes don't change industry or personal behavior.
With this loophole factory open for business on Capitol Hill again, business lobbies are spending more money than ever to curry Congressional favor. The real-estate industry may be in dire financial straits, but housing industry PACs have already contributed $56 million to political campaigns this election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Politico.com reported last week that 40 new business lobbying firms have registered since January to represent the likes of concrete makers, home builders, Freddie Mac and the Realtors. Wall Street investment banks are also pumping up the volume of campaign contributions as they seek financial relief from the subprime mess.
Congress is creating all of these new loopholes even as overall tax revenues are slowing and this year's budget deficit could reach $450 billion to $500 billion. This will play nicely into the hands of Democrats who contend that the lower tax rates of 2001 and 2003 must expire to pay the government's bills. So we could soon have the worst of all worlds: a leaky tax code full of exceptions for powerful interests, but with ever higher rates to make up for the loopholes. Congress gets PAC contributions in return for the loopholes, plus any extra revenue from the tax hike. The losers are taxpayers who aren't powerful or rich enough to afford a tax lobbyist.
At least this exercise is making clear what Democrats really mean by tax "fairness." It means raising tax rates so they can then sell tax breaks to the highest corporate bidder. We have certainly come a long way from 1986, when a Democratic Congress joined with Ronald Reagan to strip the tax code of most tax deductions and lower tax rates to a high of 28%. That reform spirit is dead on Capitol Hill.
Senators Clinton and Barack Obama are racing across the country promising Americans that they will clean up a process that "favors Wall Street over Main Street." Fat chance. Their party and most Republicans just voted for a housing bill that is the biggest victory for corporate special interests in years – and there's much more to follow. Happy Tax Day.
-- Wall Street Journal
Labels: Clinton, Congress, earmarks, Economics, tax cuts, taxes
Brought to you by Sunlight Foundation, a Google Earth map of all the earmark recipients. And while you're at it be sure to check out their visualization charts for earmarks categorized by state, government agency, etc.
Two of my favorites are the Earmark Tagcloud, and the Earmark per Capita by State.
Let's start with the latter. California, for example, is ranked first in population with roughly 34 million persons. Florida, is ranked fourth with almost 16 million. West Virginia, 37th in rank at 1.8 million people. And Alaska is 48th with 627,000 people.
Thus it only reasonable that...
California - $45.50 per capita
Florida - $41.30 per capita
West Virginia - $262.80
Alaska - $1,053.70 per capita
Yep, you read that right. Ted Stephens, our favorite R.I.N.O.
The Earmark Tagcloud is just comical. A tagcloud, if you don't know, is (Wikipedia) "a visual depiction of content tags used on a website...typically listed alphabetically, and tag frequency is shown with font size or color."
My old buddy Jim, aka Cynical J, years ago prophesied the downfall of Hollywood revenues due to their lack of creativity (See: sequels, remakes, etc.). He used to joke that movie producers would pick their movie titles by randomly choosing sexed up "action" words from a pair of bowls and then insert implied prepositions. So you'd get "Sleeping (with the) Enemy," or "Marked (for) Death," or "12 Monkeys," or "True Romance," and you get the... ahem... picture.
Well, the Earmark Tagcloud proves our Congressional leaders to be just as unoriginal in their justifications for wasting your money.
Coming soon to an unpopulated state nowhere near you, Youth Research Project (of Doom)! Rated R.
Labels: Congress, corruption, earmarks, Spending
[WSJ] What remains is a sham of a reform. A prohibition on allowing Members to trade earmarks for votes? Gone. A restriction on allowing Members and their staff from promoting earmarks from which they or their families would receive a direct financial benefit? All but gone. The original reform required earmarks to be listed on the Internet and searchable 48 hours before consideration of legislation; the new bill says this is only required if it is "technically feasible." Here's betting Congress finds other urgent uses for its tech staff during Appropriations season.
Our favorite switcheroo: Under the previous Senate reform, the Senate parliamentarian would have determined whether a bill complied with earmark disclosure rules. Under Mr. Reid's new version, the current Majority Leader, that is Mr. Reid himself, will decide if a bill is in compliance. When was the last time a Majority Party Leader declared one of his own bills out of order?
Labels: campaign finance, Congress, earmarks, ethics
