Month: November 2009

Observations on the ’emergency House call’

Yesterday I was in Washington, D.C. because Michele Bachmann asked me to be. But I wasn’t the only one there.

And this was just the crowd when we made it there at 11 o'clock, an hour before the rally was slated to begin.

Luckily it was a pleasant November day, but those of us gathered had a purpose – to defend our liberty.

I just liked the shot with the sun shining through the flag.

Tomorrow the House is slated to vote on the Pelosicare bill, better known as H.R. 3962.

I took this photo in the office of Rep. Glenn Thompson, the Congressman I interviewed earlier this week. I guess he better get cracking on reading this!

So tens of thousands of us decided to pay a visit to OUR House and set these people straight. Does this look like Astroturf to you?

I took this shot looking back toward the Washington Monument.

This was taken from the back of the crowd looking toward the Capitol.

And they were freedom-loving Americans.

Passing the American flag overhead gave me an opportunity to take this shot with the Capitol dome in the background.

But unlike a true TEA Party, there was more of a partisan flavor to this event. Not to say that most Republicans aren’t in agreement that Pelosicare is a bad idea, but they certainly take some of the blame for passing other bad bills in the recent past. Here’s one Congressman gladhanding the crowd on my end of the Capitol steps.

I don't know who this is off the top of my head, but he was playing politics.

As the program began, the GOP representatives formed the backdrop for each speaker.

It may be difficult to see in the center of the picture, but the neatly-arranged rows of well-dressed people were the House's Republican caucus.

But the presentation, which featured luminaries like Jon Voight, John Ratzenberger, and crowd favorite Mark Levin, was truly the draw to get people to Washington. Their assignment after the show was over was to visit their representatives on D.C. turf. Most of them heeded that advice.

A line of people waited to get through security at one of the entrances of the Cannon House Office Building.

And a good number of them came just to see our favorite Blue Dog Congressman, Frank Kratovil.

It's a touch blurry with no flash, but you can tell the hallway was full of people urging Frank Kratovil to just say 'no' to Pelosicare.

In truth, most of these people only got to speak to Kratovil’s staff because the House was still in session and voting. Apparently Frank has heard the District and would vote against the bill. He really should heed the advice on this lady’s sign.

Advice for the Blue Dogs.

I’m throwing this shot in because a lot of people wanted to see Levin speak and I happen to agree with this guy’s sign.

I can just see the ProgDel folks calling this guy a 'raaaaaaacist!' I assume the sign refers to President Obama and not Mark Levin.

Yet the mainstream media doesn’t seem to get it yet. Check out where this CBS News reporter set up shop.

I took this shot from the bus as we were arriving at the protest. Hey, come on over where the news is!!

The vote is slated for tomorrow, but storm clouds are gathering over the Capital. This powerful storm has an ETA of November 2, 2010.

As we were leaving, the clouds were gathering and lent themselves to a dramatic shot of the Capitol.

A chat with Rep. Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (PA-5)

I was asked by the editors of Red County to speak to the freshman Congressman from the Keystone State yesterday. So while I’m away (quite possibly to speak with him again in person) I’ll bring this interview to you.

Yesterday morning I had the pleasure of speaking to the Pennsylvania Congressman, who was one of just 17 Republicans in the 111th Congressional freshman class.

Obviously the initial conversation turned to Tuesday’s election results, and aside from categorizing the New York-23 race as an “outlier”, Thompson was pleased with the returns. The swing between the 2008 results favoring President Obama in those three jurisdictions presented a “message to the country (in) two bellweather states” that Americans had had enough of spending, taxing, borrowing, and intrusive government.

The Hoffman-Owens-Scozzafava race was also intriguing to Thompson as a former Republican county chairman. Part of the issue with how the race turned out was not having any voter input as to who the GOP candidate would be because of the compressed election schedule. Having a more normal timeframe to campaign may well have yielded a batter result, GT argued.

But health care was the “front and center” issue, and Thompson planned on being one of the Republicans participating in today’s rally on the Capitol steps sponsored by Rep. Michelle Bachmann of Minnesota.

As one of the seventeen freshman in the minority party, I asked him where he could be most effective. Thompson noted that the newly-minted Republicans had “stayed on message” and intended to be a “force to be contended with” as the events of the 111th Congress played out. He decried the “wedge in decision-making between physician and patient” that current Pelosicare legislation encouraged.

I also found out that a “manager’s amendment” was added to the House health care bill Tuesday, with 42 additional pages designed to buy off individual members, or, as Thompson called it, “let’s make a deal.”

Having spent nearly three decades in the healthcare field, most recently as a nursing home administrator, Thompson assumed when he was elected last year that health care and Social Security would be the predominant issues he’d face upon being sworn in. His idea to improve health care was to increase access and affordability (indeed, he voted in favor of SCHIP expansion) but instead this legislation would create a “legacy of debt” using figures that were “worse than fuzzy math.” Meanwhile, Medicare would remain “systematically underfunded” according to GT.

In other Congressional matters, Thompson was “disappointed” in the “cap and tax” legislation which would negatively impact his largely rural district, which is Pennsylvania’s largest geographically. It’s quite comparable to my home district in Maryland, so I asked Thompson about having a GOP district in a heavily Democrat state.

Perhaps, though, even his state is not so blue. Rep. Thompson pointed out that , in addition to the well-publicized win in neighboring New Jersey, Pennsylvania had a little-noticed GOP win Tuesday as Joan Orie Melvin won election to their state Supreme Court, giving the Republicans a 4-3 majority at a time when redistricting after next year’s census could end up being reviewed by that body. So the Republican brand isn’t completely out of favor as pundits thought after last year’s election of Barack Obama.

It’s these election results which cheer Thompson and present hope that he’ll be part of the majority party soon. With a relatively safe seat (no Democrat has represented the 5th District area since 1979) it’s likely that GT can stay the course provided he remains conservative enough for the voters of the district.

Chamber caves

Well, chalk another one up to manmade climate change hysteria. From the U.S. Chamber of Commerce:

November 3, 2009
The Honorable Barbara Boxer
Chairman
Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable James Inhofe
Ranking Member
Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce believes climate change is an important issue for this Congress to address. The Chamber stands ready to work with Congress to resolve this issue in a bipartisan manner that recognizes regional differences, the state of the technology, and the compelling need for a solution that minimizes overall economic impact. As your committee reopens discussion on a climate bill, the Chamber urges you to take steps to bridge the political and geographical divide that prevented the enactment of comprehensive climate legislation in 2003, 2005, and 2008, and appears to have stalled the current effort.

It is time to consider a different approach.

The challenge of drafting comprehensive climate legislation is not “whether” to do something, but “how.” There are many good ideas out there that can serve as a solid, workable, commonsense and realistic foundation on which to craft a bill. The Chamber commends Senators Kerry and Graham for their recent New York Times editorial on the need for comprehensive climate legislation. The Chamber welcomes the call for a new conversation on how to address the issue, and believes their editorial can serve as a solid, workable, commonsense foundation on which to craft a bill. Many other important details are needed, but the Chamber agrees that the objectives outlined in that editorial, coupled with their clear recognition that “this process requires honest give-and-take and genuine bipartisanship,” can move this important policy objective forward in a bipartisan manner that garners strong business community support.

Senators Kerry and Graham have set forth a positive, practical and realistic framework for legislation, one that echoes the core principles that the Chamber embeds in all of its communications on climate policy. The Chamber agrees with a great deal of the principles set forth by Senators Kerry and Graham, in particular that legislation should: minimize the impact on major emitters; reduce price volatility for consumers; protect global competitiveness; invest in renewable energy sources; take advantage of nuclear power; streamline the permit system; make us the “Saudi Arabia of clean coal” by fostering carbon capture and sequestration technology; commit to increased environmentally responsible onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration; contain consumer and intellectual property protections; protect against agency regulation under existing laws not written for greenhouse gases; strengthen the hand of our international negotiators; and increase our own energy security and energy efficiency.

Good ideas are not limited to Senators Kerry and Graham. Proposals by Senators Alexander, Barrasso, Baucus, Bingaman, Cantwell, Dorgan, Lieberman, Murkowski, Vitter and Voinovich (to name a few) all contain elements that can be used in conjunction with the Kerry-Graham proposal and the positive aspects of S. 1733, the “Clean Energy Jobs and Power Act,” to craft a realistic, cost-effective and environmentally meaningful climate change bill.

Shaping a bill the Chamber, the broader business community, and a bipartisan majority in the House and Senate approve of will take significant effort. The Chamber will continue to oppose bad policies that resemble the failed climate proposals of the past, such as bills that jeopardize American jobs, create trade inequalities, leave open the Clean Air Act, open the door to CO2-based mass tort litigation, and further hamper the permitting process for clean energy. But the Chamber believes Senators Kerry, Graham, and the other named Senators have taken a constructive and positive stand on global climate change and energy security, rising above partisan politics and opening a real discussion on how to address this important issue. The Chamber has developed many other recommendations that would complement these approaches to strengthen our nation’s energy security, power our economy, and create jobs, and protect the environment, and we welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss these important issues.

Sincerely,

R. Bruce Josten

Cc: The Members of the United States Senate

In response, CEI urged Chamber members to answer the national organization “by calling on small businesses to drop their Chamber membership and join CEI in fighting this catastrophic legislation.”

Let’s see. People like to think of the Chamber of Commerce (at least on a national level) as a conservative organization. But I have news for them – you’re not going to get a proposal that solely addresses your concerns out of this Congress. Instead, you’re going to get the taxes and onerous restrictions the Democrats want as they ignore your concerns – after all, you’re a “conservative” organization (excepting your pro-amnesty stance on illegal immigration.)

Indeed, the challenge IS “whether” to do something. Since we can’t legislate the activity of the sun, believing that any lawmaking body can regulate climate change is pure folly. The only climate which can be changed is America’s business climate, which would be hit with the force of a hurricane if any climate change legislation passes.

Hopefully local Chambers will protest the national Chamber’s insensitivity to their local needs because any legislation passed by this Congress is likely to do irreparable harm to America’s business community.

Pappas drops Governor bid, endorses Hogan

Late this afternoon Mike Pappas dropped his nearly yearlong bid to become Maryland’s next Governor and threw his support behind fellow Republican Larry Hogan.

In his announcement, Pappas noted, “(a)fter considering all the challenges ahead and my personal requirements at home and in my law practice, I have determined that the best interest of my family and business requires that I stop my run for Governor effective immediately.” He cited both family reasons and the need to attend to clients of his legal practice as the two key reasons for withdrawing.

Pappas concluded that:

Some may question the timing of this decision given the tremendous victories Republicans won in elections this week.  However, those victories exemplify the kind of results we can achieve as Republicans with good candidates.  Although I believe that I personally make an excellent candidate, the realities of a State-wide race require more time than I can provide at this time, and I will not run such a race at anything less than 100%. 

Moreover, I have spent a considerable amount of time getting to know Larry Hogan since he entered the Governor’s race this Summer.  Larry and I share many of the same beliefs and ideas on how to rescue Maryland from the devastation caused by the failed policies of the Democrats in Annapolis.  Larry brings a great perspective to the race and has the qualities and resources necessary to mount a successful run for Governor.  With my withdrawal, Larry can focus his efforts on winning the general election and build on the momentum that started this week.

Therefore, I am proud to also announce that I am endorsing Larry Hogan for Governor in 2010 and am asking all of my supporters and members of Team Pappas to also support Larry in every way that they can.  I will be working hard for Larry, and I hope you all will do the same. 

I am deeply grateful to every person that joined our team, attended our events, contributed to the campaign, offered a word of encouragement, and challenged me to hold myself to a higher standard as a candidate and a citizen.

As for Hogan, he was pleased to gain the backing of Pappas.

I am honored to have the support of Mike Pappas. As the only candidate for Governor over the last ten months, Mike and his team have worked tirelessly building support across the state. Mike has been a consistent voice and leader for Maryland Republicans. He’s got a great future in politics,” said Hogan. “Mike and I both want to see common sense and fiscal responsibility return to Annapolis. I’m excited to have the Pappas team join my campaign.”

“Governor O’Malley’s failed record of lost jobs, higher spending, record tax increases, and broken promises is unacceptable. Maryland families deserve better. I look forward to working with Mike and his outstanding team to give the people of Maryland a real choice for change in November 2010.

So the GOP field is cleared as Pappas is the second wouldbe Republican candidate for Governor to drop out. Charles Lollar of Calvert County had been rumored to throw his hat into the ring, but residency issues interfered with his plans. Instead Lollar is in the race against Steny Hoyer in the Fifth Congressional District.

Lollar and Pappas may not be the only GOP dropouts, though. Hogan has indicated his desire to step aside should former governor Bob Ehrlich decide to make another run at the state’s top spot, but Ehrlich has been coy about announcing his intentions. It could be next year before Ehrlich reveals his hand, a wait which distresses some state Republicans (including myself.)

But at least until Ehrlich makes his decision, Hogan can now train his guns on incumbent governor Martin O’Malley and O’Malley has given him plenty to criticize as the state’s budgetary woes continue despite plenty of stimulus assistance from Democratic partymate President Barack Obama. With Chris Christie defeating a governor who couldn’t keep his promises just up the coast in New Jersey, Maryland Republicans can hope that lightning strikes again in what’s presumably the bluest of states outside Massachusetts.

My take on Election Day 2009

There are four elections drawing nationwide attention today.

I put my 2 cents in on NY-23 yesterday as part of a longer post by selected Red County editors, which is found here. It’s interesting, though, that this race would simply replace a Republican with a somewhat more conservative Republican should Doug Hoffman win, but it’s essentially a Democratic seat rental if Bill Owens wins. Next year the GOP will have a chance to vote on and unite behind one candidate who should dispatch Owens handily given the usual margin of victory for Republicans out of that district.

Meanwhile, there’s another Congressional election in California (10th District) drawing interest because the seat is thought to be a safely Democrat one. Yet California’s lieutentant governor, John Garamendi, was only up by single digits in some polls over Republican David Harmer in a district that went about 2-1 for Obama last year. Obviously a Harmer win would be a huge upset but a close loss would show the Democrats’ weakness among a voter bloc they won big with in 2008.

Governor Jon Corzine in New Jersey is needing a huge assist from President Obama and a large advantage in campaign spending to hang on over Republican Chris Christie. Don’t be surprised if New Jersey 2009 comes out something like Maryland 1994, with the Republican leading until the last votes are counted in one of New Jersey’s more urban areas. It’s also a case where an independent may take away just enough votes from the GOP contender to hand the election to a Democrat.

One has to ask, though: with such a large Democratic voter registration advantage in New Jersey, why should this race even be close? Certainly a GOP win there gives hope to pulling an upset here in Maryland next year.

Finally, we have Virginia, where the Republicans are expected to sweep into executive branch power.  But the question will be what kind of coattails Bob McDonnell has. Closer to home, we have a first-time Republican candidate running in the 100th District (which comprises the entire Virginia Eastern Shore and a small part of the Norfolk area)for the House of Delegates against an entrenched three-term Democrat who was unopposed the last two elections. Whether Melody Scalley can get an assist from the GOP tide remains to be seen because it’s tough to knock off an incumbent – particularly one who portrays himself as a “moderate” Democrat.

I know tonight and tomorrow will have spin from all sides, and don’t worry – I’ll have mine too. Makes for an interesting night of television since it’s an off-day for the World Series.

al-Qaeda beats the system

This is a post I wrote for the Red County National page and was their featured article earlier this afternoon. It’s a reversal because generally my RC pieces start here and then go to that site. But I was asked to take on more reporterly assignments for the RC site and this is my first.

*****

In case you missed it, last Thursday a federal judge reduced the sentence of an al-Qaeda sleeper agent and enabled him to be freed– in just five years.

Disdaining a maximum fifteen-year sentence, U.S. District Judge Michael Mihm, a Reagan appointee who recently announced his retirement upon confirmation of a successor, sentenced Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri to eight years and four months in prison. al-Marri’s legal team pled for a shorter sentence based on time served as an enemy combatant before his case was shifted from the military justice system to a civilian court in February, shortly after President Obama took office.

The defendant, a citizen of both Qatar and Saudi Arabia, was taken into military custody in June 2003 after the Bush Administration reviewed his case and determined he was an enemy combatant. While al-Marri’s legal team maintained he had the right to habeas corpus in 2004, the request was denied because of his non-citizen status and al-Marri remained in military prison. Once his case was moved to an Illinois federal court earlier this year, al-Marri pled guilty to one count of conspiring to provide support to terrorists, which carries the maximum penalty of fifteen years in prison.

Al-Marri, who graduated from Bradley University in 1991, purportedly returned to the United States with his wife and five children on September 10, 2001 to pursue graduate studies at the school, but in fact he rarely attended classes. He was first detained shortly after the September 11 attacks, and FBI agents found links on his laptop computer to sites of distributors of hydrogen cyanide, programs for computer hacking software and “proxy” software, as well. They also found dozens of bogus credit card numbers listed in al-Marri’s laptop case.

It was deemed that possible targets he had in his sights included a number of dams and reservoirs, apparently part of an abortive plot to poison a domestic water supply.

Phone records acquired as part of the al-Marri investigation also reveal a number of calls placed to Mustafa Ahmed Al-Hawsawi, a leading financier of al-Qaeda, at a phone number based in the United Arab Emirates. It’s also alleged that al-Marri used an alias and dummy company to falsify credit card transactions during an earlier visit to the United States in 2000.

Yet despite the strong evidence that al-Marri was a “continuing grave threat” as an al-Qaeda operative, Judge Mihm reduced his sentence based on time already served. Worse, he credited al-Marri nine months for time served in military custody, in what his defense attorneys argued were “harsh” conditions!

While Judge Mihm may have been swayed by al-Marri’s tearful defense testimony where he claimed he “was glad I have no blood on my hand,” make no mistake: al Marri was an al Qaeda sleeper dedicated to doing great harm to America. Witness this statement from a now-unclassified declaration by Jeffery N. Rapp, Director of the Joint Intelligence Task Force on Combating Terrorism:

“Multiple intelligence sources confirm that Al-Marri is an al Qaeda “sleeper” agent sent to the United States for the purpose of engaging in and facilitating terrorist activities subsequent to September 11, 2001, and exploring ways to hack into the computer systems of U.S. banks and otherwise disrupt the U.S. financial system. Prior to arriving in the United States on September 10, 2001, Al-Marri was trained at an al Qaeda terror camp. He met personally with Osama Bin Laden (Bin Laden) and other known al Qaeda members and volunteered for a martyr mission or to do anything else that al Qaeda requested. Al-Marri was assisted in his al Qaeda assignment to the United States by known al Qaeda members and travelled to the United States with money provided for him by al Qaeda. Al-Marri currently possesses information of high intelligence value, including information about personnel and activities of Al Qaeda.

Yet this reality didn’t faze Judge Mihm: “My personal belief as a judge is that (treatment) was totally unacceptable. That’s not who we are,” he remarked.

The lenient sentence for al-Marri rightly worries domestic security advocates who already question the wisdom of trying detainees currently held at Guantanamo Bay in civilian courts. Mihm’s light sentence and his consideration of time served under military custody could set a precedent for future trials of the more than 200 detainees presently held in Cuba.

Thus, in just over five years, a known al-Qaeda operative will be free to return to his homeland and hatch more terrorist plots against America and her allies. With national security still in peril by those allied with al-Qaeda, punishment meted out off the battlefield isn’t proving to be a strong deterrent against recruiting America-hating terrorists either overseas or domestically.

The sentence also shows that the January announcement by President Obama to close Guantanamo Bay by next year may do further damage to national security now and in the future. Placing the fate of suspected terrorists in the hands of civilian judges will prove harmful to both the concept of justice and the plan to deter Islamic terrorism on our own soil.

Hopefully, last week’s sentencing travesty gave our young administration a dose of reality; perhaps now it will re-consider its plans to grant terrorists access to our courtrooms, a battlefield on which we most certainly will lose.

Powerful message from Pence

Normally I like to put up selected videos on my Friday Night Videos feature, but this one is both inspiring and time-sensitive.

The key in this fight is going to be Blue Dog Democrats. We need to make sure they realize that a vote for Obamacare comes at their electoral peril. They can be part of the new conservative resurgence or they can be roadkill in 2010.

The time is nigh for action once again, as apparently the House Obamacare vote is on tap for later this week. I’m aware that the AFP folks have a meeting set up with Congressman Kratovil on Friday but if they want to influence his health care vote that may be too late.

There is also a bid by Rep. Michelle Bachmann for a smaller version of the 9-12 rally on Thursday, with a noontime gathering at the Capitol then visits to various Congressmen. For those who aren’t able to get to Washington, D.C. on such short notice there’s a call for people to meet at the Congressional district offices and state capitals at noon Thursday.

Regardless of the venue, the idea is the same: stop Obamacare in its tracks. Let’s get to work.

America’s next great (liberal) pundit

A few weeks ago, the Washington Post decided to sponsor a contest to find “America’s Next Great Pundit.” Being one who likes to compare himself with others in his field and who likes to write anyway, I submitted an entry like about 4,800 other people did.

After reading the winning entries though, I’m not sure if the judging was based solely on writing ability or if there wasn’t a heaping helping of political slant involved. Obviously the Post has a pretty liberal editorial viewpoint but it’s hard for me to believe that many portside writers are that much better than those of us who toil on the conservative side. Besides, with twice as many Americans identifying themselves as conservative as liberal, the numerical superiority should be on our side, even in this case.

But I’ll let you judge for yourself. You can read the ten finalists’ entries here and compare them to what I wrote. Honestly, I found some fairly witty and well-written but others made me wonder what the judges were thinking. The entry bounced off a post I did about earmarks last month.

*****

Earmarks: tip of the iceberg

The other day I received an e-mail from the campaign of Dr. Eric Wargotz, one of several Republicans aiming at a chance to unseat Maryland’s longtime Senator Barb Mikulski next fall. Citing a news report, Wargotz chastises Mikulski for steering $10.5 million in earmarks to three of her largest campaign contributors as part of $42 million in pork spending she slipped into the upcoming defense appropriations bill.

This implied quid pro quo often infuriates supporters of campaign finance reform and advocates of good government, and similar practices were even a minor issue in last year’s Presidential campaign as both John McCain – a longtime foe of earmarks – and Barack Obama vowed to cut back on the practice, promising to veto earmark-laden bills placed before them.

We’ve seen the result of President Obama’s nod to fiscal conservatism, but there’s much more afoot at the people’s house than a few million dollars’ worth of what are essentially no-bid contracts.

To complain about a proverbial drop in the federal bucket when Congress is considering provisions which would balloon the deficit and enrich some favored corporations and industries at the expense of others misses a larger point. Nor can we discount that much of the new bureaucracy being conceived will take the decisions of everyday life out of the hands of individuals in the private sector and place it safely within the Beltway, empowering wannabe experts who may not have even been vetted to make economic decisions affecting all of us.

Simply put, it is not the place of government at any level to create law picking winners or losers. Naturally some adroitly adapt to changing regulations and prosper, but too many corporate entities look to government as their salvation and far too many public servants, both in Washington and state capitals, are only too happy to help because it also gives them a reason for being.

Perhaps the true intention behind the complaint about Senator Mikulski is to make a clarion call for returning to a more principled government. To Americans who are simply fed up with “politics as usual”, the only steps which may be satisfactory to them would be those taken to reduce the size and scope of government. Earmarks are the low-hanging fruit, but the tree is ripe for the picking.

*****

So what do you think? The worst offense may have been mixing metaphors, but that’s nothing I’ve not seen other columnists do.

Tarnished black gold

It was just over a year ago that Congress allowed a ban on offshore oil exploration to expire. In the wake of a summer featuring $4 a gallon gasoline and an angry public demanding we “drill here, drill now, and pay less” the time was ripe for increasing domestic exploration and production of oil and natural gas.

But as pump prices slowly declined from their peak and Barack Obama won the election with a promise to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, the focus for our energy solution turned from finding new oil to research into new technologies in the renewable energy field. With 2009 having come and nearly gone without another huge spike in pump prices, there hasn’t been the intensity of demand for ramping up exploration for oil and natural gas off our shores – or anywhere else domestically for that matter.

Yet other nations haven’t turned their back on black gold. A large number of newly found oilfields worldwide may push this year’s total discovery to 20 billion barrels of new reserves, the best mark since 2000. While some American oil companies are involved in these finds and will bring those fields online in coming years, they do little to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Instead, the Department of the Interior has dithered and delayed on the enactment of the most recent five-year offshore drilling plan and tacitly supported the numerous environmental groups who throw roadblocks into the process of finding oil and natural gas by demanding more impact studies. Their stalling tactics have placed a number of promising projects on the back burner and forced energy companies to go elsewhere for the supplies they need to meet our national demand.

It seems that the Obama administration’s haste to cut American carbon emissions – a process aided by our moribund economy – has led to no small amount of uncertainty among companies supplying our energy needs. It’s an uncertainty that exacerbates the oil import problem Obama pledged to solve because new technology, which certainly essential to our future needs, does little to help in the here and now. We can’t fuel those cars bought with the taxpayers’ “Cash for Clunkers” money with wind or sunshine.

Moreover, in a recessionary period where new private-sector jobs are scarce, the economic boost additional domestic oil and gas exploration can provide would aid in pulling America out of its doldrums. Each job created extracting oil or natural gas spawns other jobs in a number of service and manufacturing sectors at minimum cost to the taxpayer. In the case of offshore drilling the federal government stands to gain billions of dollars in leasing fees if exploration is allowed in areas previously off-limits.

The only thing seemingly standing in the way of a balanced approach combining increased exploration and development of America’s oil and natural gas reserves and the research and discovery of new energy technology is the lobby which believes in manmade climate change, despite the global temperature decline over the last decade. It’s that group pressing our government for concessions at the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen this December.

Instead of passing the Waxman-Markey or Kerry-Boxer legislation, which favors the unproven technology of renewable energy and taxes the carbon-based energy sources we rely on now, let’s step back and allow the market to prevail. The sticker shock of $4 a gallon gasoline we experienced a summer ago may be a fond memory if we place ourselves at the mercy of foreign oil suppliers without a backup plan of new exploration to see us through.

Michael Swartz is a Liberty Features Syndicate writer.

This was the thirteenth in my continuing LFS series and cleared October 22nd.