The next time that your filling up your tank, remember that John Kline’s protest is sending your Minnesota tax dollars elsewhere.
That’s right.
For every gallon of gas that you buy, you pay a Federal Tax of 18.4 cents per gallon. Originally these tax dollars went into the general treasury, but since the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 was established, it stipulated that 100% of the gas tax be deposited into Highway Trust Fund. Those dollars are then re-distributed back to the states. If your congressman is doing his job, all your Federal Tax dollars will be returned to your state resulting in jobs and well maintained infrastructure.
But John Kline decided to protest the system. The result according to Bob Hofstad of MnDOT is that the state receives about 92 cents for every dollar that its residents send to Washington. According to Tony Kellen, president of the Minnesota Public Transit Association, about 40 percent of the money in the state's transportation budget comes from the federal gas and diesel tax.
Now, Kline may give the impression since his favorite imported vodka is SurReal (from Latvia) that he would be a pretty savvy investor, but an 8% loss is not a good return on our tax dollars. Now, maybe private citizen investor Kline is okay with that, but these are our public dollars.
Kline’s concern is with the “earmark” system whereby Congress authorizes specific projects. We can all agree that there are many examples of “wasteful Washington spending” but not all “earmarks” are wasteful.
John Kline believes the “earmark” system “is a broken process” and has pledged not to seek earmarks. According to Kline, the best way to fight an irrational process is not to take part in it but protest it, as a handful of other congressional members have agreed to do. Kline is now joined by Sixth District Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in taking the “no earmarks pledge”.
Some may see that as a noble cause, but taxpayers should view this as unwise idealistic quixotical lonely persuit using our tax dollars.
There are better ways to address the abuses in the “earmark” system.
First District Congressman Tim Walz is a practioner of transparency in his funding requests. According to Walz, “Minnesota sends more money to Washington that it gets back, and it’s appropriate for us to advocate for the good use of tax dollars (in the district).”
Walz stands up and fights for our dollars, while Kline is inclined to stand in protest.
As I wrote in August, 2007, members of Congress must work with state DOT so that monies are allocated based on the needs and not a Congressman’s personal vision.
So transparency and MnDot agreement is what is needed.
According to the Star-Tribune, Kline's rejection of earmarks has reverberations in Second District.
Voters need to consider Kline’s stance versus his challenger, Steve Sarvi … but also John McCain and Barack Obama.
McCain has vowed to veto all legislation that contains “earmarks” … another idealistic quixotical lonely persuit, but as President he could affect some spending. If he is successful, in theory, Congress will have no impact on how gas tax dollars are returned to the states … it is possible that our 8% loss could grow if the new McCain Administration deemed that infrastructure needs are greater in faster developing states like Arizona.
Barack Obama will address the infrastructure challenge by creating a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments. This independent entity will be directed to invest in our nation’s most challenging transportation infrastructure needs. The Bank will receive an infusion of federal money, $60 billion over 10 years, to provide financing to transportation infrastructure projects across the nation. These projects will create up to two million new direct and indirect jobs per year and stimulate approximately $35 billion per year in new economic activity. link
The next president will enter office with a fragile economy. No doubt that some stimulus package will be suggested. One of George Bush’s first actions was in June of 2001 with the “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001" which included tax cuts and rebate checks. McCain is talking of maintaining those tax cuts (and the other Bush cuts.) Obama may act instead to push investment in infrastructure that will produce jobs.
If Kline is re-elected and McCain is president, “earmarks” may be over … however if Kline is re-elected and Obama is president, Minnesota will have one Congressman standing in protest.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
MN-02 : Is Guilt the cause of John Kline Earmark Pledge ?
To state that "This Congress and this Administration have failed to meet their responsibilities to manage the government. " is a rather tough critique.
And the conclusion "That is simply inexcusable." is harsher.
That was part of the speech that Republican Presidential candidate John McCain gave on Monday. McCain is staking his economic plan on cutting earmarks but earmarks may not be as much of the problem as poor oversight by Congress and poor management by government agencies.
Republican John Kline (MN-02) has taken the “No Earmarks Pledge”.
But why ?
There is a vast difference between earmarks and wasteful government spending … although an earmark could be a wasteful government project, many earmarks are good investments and ensure that the monies are spent according to Congress’ (that would mean the People) desires and not the Administration.
But John Kline has called the earmarks a broken process
and his pledge is a form of protest. So, fast growing communitities suffer, while Kline protests.
Yet, I wonder if it isn’t guilt.
As a member of Congress, Kline has been part that has seen --in John McCain’s words--"Government has grown by 60 percent in the last eight years."
RoveRobots had to support Bush, but Kline also has a responsibility in his committee assignments to make sure that monies were spent wisely.
The General Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a report addressing ineffective management of weapons systems that "cost increases that add up to hundreds of millions of dollars, schedule delays that add up to years, and capabilities that fall short of what was promised."
Some projects cited include :
Global Hawk was $900 million; the first review increased that prediction to $967 million. The current estimate is $3.15 billion.
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) was $1.1 billion, but it is expected to cost nearly $3.6 billion.
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) was $338 million and is now $2 billion.
The GAO concludes that if this trend "goes unchecked and fiscal pressures to reduce spending continue to grow as expected, Congress will be faced with a difficult choice to either pull funds from other federal programs to support Defense acquisitions or accept less warfighting capability than promised."
In an earlier commentary, the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) which the CBO estimates will grow 60% over budget, and the increase in fuel costs were discussed.
It has been well reported that Congress lacked oversight in the Iraq and Afghanistan theatres, but "That is simply inexcusable" for Congress to allow the DOD to mismanage activities right here in the USA.
Is it guilt that makes John Kline deny obtaining justifiable earmarks for the Second District as he knows of how dire Congress is managing our monies ?
Instead of taking the “No Earmarks Pledge”, Kline should take the “No Lobbyists and PAC Money Pledge … after all his Freedom & Security PAC has received monies from Lockheed Martin, and other government contractors. Last year, the largest federal contractor, Lockheed Martin, received contracts worth more than the total combined budgets of the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Interior, the Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Congress. And No-bid (non-competitive) contracts have grown by 115% during Kline’s years.
And the conclusion "That is simply inexcusable." is harsher.
That was part of the speech that Republican Presidential candidate John McCain gave on Monday. McCain is staking his economic plan on cutting earmarks but earmarks may not be as much of the problem as poor oversight by Congress and poor management by government agencies.
Republican John Kline (MN-02) has taken the “No Earmarks Pledge”.
But why ?
There is a vast difference between earmarks and wasteful government spending … although an earmark could be a wasteful government project, many earmarks are good investments and ensure that the monies are spent according to Congress’ (that would mean the People) desires and not the Administration.
But John Kline has called the earmarks a broken process
and his pledge is a form of protest. So, fast growing communitities suffer, while Kline protests.
Yet, I wonder if it isn’t guilt.
As a member of Congress, Kline has been part that has seen --in John McCain’s words--"Government has grown by 60 percent in the last eight years."
RoveRobots had to support Bush, but Kline also has a responsibility in his committee assignments to make sure that monies were spent wisely.
The General Accountability Office (GAO) has issued a report addressing ineffective management of weapons systems that "cost increases that add up to hundreds of millions of dollars, schedule delays that add up to years, and capabilities that fall short of what was promised."
Some projects cited include :
Global Hawk was $900 million; the first review increased that prediction to $967 million. The current estimate is $3.15 billion.
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) was $1.1 billion, but it is expected to cost nearly $3.6 billion.
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) was $338 million and is now $2 billion.
The GAO concludes that if this trend "goes unchecked and fiscal pressures to reduce spending continue to grow as expected, Congress will be faced with a difficult choice to either pull funds from other federal programs to support Defense acquisitions or accept less warfighting capability than promised."
In an earlier commentary, the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) which the CBO estimates will grow 60% over budget, and the increase in fuel costs were discussed.
It has been well reported that Congress lacked oversight in the Iraq and Afghanistan theatres, but "That is simply inexcusable" for Congress to allow the DOD to mismanage activities right here in the USA.
Is it guilt that makes John Kline deny obtaining justifiable earmarks for the Second District as he knows of how dire Congress is managing our monies ?
Instead of taking the “No Earmarks Pledge”, Kline should take the “No Lobbyists and PAC Money Pledge … after all his Freedom & Security PAC has received monies from Lockheed Martin, and other government contractors. Last year, the largest federal contractor, Lockheed Martin, received contracts worth more than the total combined budgets of the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Interior, the Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Congress. And No-bid (non-competitive) contracts have grown by 115% during Kline’s years.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
MN-01 : Dr. Davis offers a Prescription for Health Care
When I heard that there was going to be a doctor running to represent Minnesota’s First District in Congress, I wondered what type of doctor he would be?
No, not what his specialty would be … but would he be part of the growing majority of doctors who take a different view of the intertwining of health care and private insurance industries ?
A survey published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine reported that 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, "Across the board, more physicians feel that our fragmented and for-profit insurance system is obstructing good patient care, and a majority now support national insurance as the remedy"
Yes, the health care system is facing challenges. It has been widely reported that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance, but that is just the start. Nearly all businesses with more than 200 employees offer coverage, but only 48 percent of the smallest firms do. While small businesses represent the majority of employers in this nation, it is clear they are having extreme difficulty in providing their employees with health care coverage. But even those that have insurance may not be seeking the care they should. Reuters reported : “About 20 percent of the U.S. population delayed or were unable to get access to medical care when they needed it in 2007, up from 14 percent four years earlier … For the insured, individuals said they were unable to get their health insurer to pay for treatment, or that a doctor or hospital would not accept their insurance. … medical costs - driven by drugs, hospital and doctor fees -- have risen at least twice the rate of inflation for several years, making it more expensive for those with insurance to afford care.”
The Brian Davis For Congress website has a very brief section on health care, including : “The cost of practicing medicine continues to escalate, partly because of an increase in malpractice awards which have risen at rapid rates. A government takeover of our health care system is not the answer. We should build a system that emphasizes preventive health care as well as continued progress in curative treatments. More competition in health care is part of the solution.”
Not much there …. as it seems to be a retread of George Bush’s junk lawsuit campaign strategy that doctors "should be focused on fighting illnesses, not fighting lawsuits." It got Bush votes, but nothing got done … even with a Republican Doctor as the Senate Majority Leader and Republicans in control of the House and Senate. (NOTE : S. 354 HEALTH Act of 2005 was introduced in January 2005 and got six cosponsors. Norm Coleman was not one of them.) Putting caps on damages is at the heart of the legislation but there is a universal consensus that caps would do absolutely nothing to reduce medical errors or to compensate injured patients.
A candidate’s website being void of concrete solutions is not that unusual, but Dr. Davis was recently interviewed by the Austin Daily Herald and expanded upon his views :
In his long-time field — health care — Davis said a major step is ensuring more cost transparency, thus allowing consumers to shop for elective procedures, and teaching them the market value of their care.
“We have a third party system, so they don’t see the cost of care,” he said.
Davis also advocates for more uniformity nationwide in the health insurance sector, which he believes would allow companies more opportunity to operate across state lines, thus increasing competition and reducing cost.
“We have the best health care system in the world,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it’s perfect … but I think a free market works best.”
He also recommends more consistency in medical research funding for entities like the Hormel Institute, which can experience interruptions in research as grants periodically become smaller and less available.
“I know it’s a competitive market,” Davis said. “I think what I’d like to see with the government is that they keep a very steady funding amount as long as it yields results.”
So no mention of how to address the un-insured or the under-insured or preventative care.
But he does mention transparency … getting patients to shop around for the best deal.
Well, I suppose instead using Mayo Clinic’s Immanuel-St. Joseph’s Hospital in Mankato … a quick 12 mile jaunt, I could check the prices at the hospitals in New Ulm (25miles) or Madelia (40 miles) … I’m sure that my spouse wouldn’t mind the extra travel time, gas and unfamiliarity with the doctors and staff, etc..
Dr. Davis is suggesting something along the lines of checking the Internet for the cheapest gas … that may work since all gas is formulated similarly … but health care is dependent upon the expertise and equipment of the doctors and staff.
But this idea is being tried.
www.Carol.com is a for-profit Web site that is designed for high-deductible health care insurance plans by giving consumers the information they need to get good, cost-effective medical care. Most of the information is supplied directly by Carol's 30 tenants. These are hospitals, clinics and specialty groups that pay a fee to list their services and prices on the Web site. Carol CEO Tony Miller says a site like Carol can really only work in a metropolitan area where there's health care competition.
If Dr. Davis was running for MN-03 and it’s large metropolitian area, his idea may have some merit, but out in the vast rural area of MN-01, the idea is without merit.
If Dr. Davis wants to promote transparency, it should be the transparency in how well the doctor and staff perform. For example, sites like Health Grades can provide information about a doctor, but that information may be best used by the hospital administration than the layman.
Frankly, I am not sure how increasing competition will impact price. Dr. Davis salary in 2007 was $411,720 … and I thought most insurance payments are based on “usual and customary fees for the service and area” ? And in an earlier commentary, the American Medical Association warned that smaller paydays would give doctors an incentive to stop taking Medicare patients if the 10.6% fee cut was implemented.
One other aspect in Dr. Davis’ interview that is interesting. He mentions “consistency in medical research funding for entities like the Hormel Institute’. That funding is typically done through the “earmark” process in appropriations and I thought that Dr. Davis opposed earmarks.
From his website and this interview, Dr. Davis is not going to advance my interests if he is elected.
So who’s interests will he advance ?
Reviewing his most recent FEC filing of donations to his campaign reveals that 20% of his top contributors are in the medical field … donating 20% of the funds … and representing 17 states outside of Minnesota.
On the other hand, voters know where current First District Congressman Tim Walz stands on health care. His votes in support of SCHIP, Mental Health Parity, Veterans Care are well known … plus he has co-sponsored over 20 health care bills.
Dr. Davis’s prescription for health care is bad medicine.
No, not what his specialty would be … but would he be part of the growing majority of doctors who take a different view of the intertwining of health care and private insurance industries ?
A survey published in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine reported that 59 percent said they support legislation to establish a national health insurance program, while 32 percent said they opposed it, "Across the board, more physicians feel that our fragmented and for-profit insurance system is obstructing good patient care, and a majority now support national insurance as the remedy"
Yes, the health care system is facing challenges. It has been widely reported that there are 47 million Americans without health insurance, but that is just the start. Nearly all businesses with more than 200 employees offer coverage, but only 48 percent of the smallest firms do. While small businesses represent the majority of employers in this nation, it is clear they are having extreme difficulty in providing their employees with health care coverage. But even those that have insurance may not be seeking the care they should. Reuters reported : “About 20 percent of the U.S. population delayed or were unable to get access to medical care when they needed it in 2007, up from 14 percent four years earlier … For the insured, individuals said they were unable to get their health insurer to pay for treatment, or that a doctor or hospital would not accept their insurance. … medical costs - driven by drugs, hospital and doctor fees -- have risen at least twice the rate of inflation for several years, making it more expensive for those with insurance to afford care.”
The Brian Davis For Congress website has a very brief section on health care, including : “The cost of practicing medicine continues to escalate, partly because of an increase in malpractice awards which have risen at rapid rates. A government takeover of our health care system is not the answer. We should build a system that emphasizes preventive health care as well as continued progress in curative treatments. More competition in health care is part of the solution.”
Not much there …. as it seems to be a retread of George Bush’s junk lawsuit campaign strategy that doctors "should be focused on fighting illnesses, not fighting lawsuits." It got Bush votes, but nothing got done … even with a Republican Doctor as the Senate Majority Leader and Republicans in control of the House and Senate. (NOTE : S. 354 HEALTH Act of 2005 was introduced in January 2005 and got six cosponsors. Norm Coleman was not one of them.) Putting caps on damages is at the heart of the legislation but there is a universal consensus that caps would do absolutely nothing to reduce medical errors or to compensate injured patients.
A candidate’s website being void of concrete solutions is not that unusual, but Dr. Davis was recently interviewed by the Austin Daily Herald and expanded upon his views :
In his long-time field — health care — Davis said a major step is ensuring more cost transparency, thus allowing consumers to shop for elective procedures, and teaching them the market value of their care.
“We have a third party system, so they don’t see the cost of care,” he said.
Davis also advocates for more uniformity nationwide in the health insurance sector, which he believes would allow companies more opportunity to operate across state lines, thus increasing competition and reducing cost.
“We have the best health care system in the world,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it’s perfect … but I think a free market works best.”
He also recommends more consistency in medical research funding for entities like the Hormel Institute, which can experience interruptions in research as grants periodically become smaller and less available.
“I know it’s a competitive market,” Davis said. “I think what I’d like to see with the government is that they keep a very steady funding amount as long as it yields results.”
So no mention of how to address the un-insured or the under-insured or preventative care.
But he does mention transparency … getting patients to shop around for the best deal.
Well, I suppose instead using Mayo Clinic’s Immanuel-St. Joseph’s Hospital in Mankato … a quick 12 mile jaunt, I could check the prices at the hospitals in New Ulm (25miles) or Madelia (40 miles) … I’m sure that my spouse wouldn’t mind the extra travel time, gas and unfamiliarity with the doctors and staff, etc..
Dr. Davis is suggesting something along the lines of checking the Internet for the cheapest gas … that may work since all gas is formulated similarly … but health care is dependent upon the expertise and equipment of the doctors and staff.
But this idea is being tried.
www.Carol.com is a for-profit Web site that is designed for high-deductible health care insurance plans by giving consumers the information they need to get good, cost-effective medical care. Most of the information is supplied directly by Carol's 30 tenants. These are hospitals, clinics and specialty groups that pay a fee to list their services and prices on the Web site. Carol CEO Tony Miller says a site like Carol can really only work in a metropolitan area where there's health care competition.
If Dr. Davis was running for MN-03 and it’s large metropolitian area, his idea may have some merit, but out in the vast rural area of MN-01, the idea is without merit.
If Dr. Davis wants to promote transparency, it should be the transparency in how well the doctor and staff perform. For example, sites like Health Grades can provide information about a doctor, but that information may be best used by the hospital administration than the layman.
Frankly, I am not sure how increasing competition will impact price. Dr. Davis salary in 2007 was $411,720 … and I thought most insurance payments are based on “usual and customary fees for the service and area” ? And in an earlier commentary, the American Medical Association warned that smaller paydays would give doctors an incentive to stop taking Medicare patients if the 10.6% fee cut was implemented.
One other aspect in Dr. Davis’ interview that is interesting. He mentions “consistency in medical research funding for entities like the Hormel Institute’. That funding is typically done through the “earmark” process in appropriations and I thought that Dr. Davis opposed earmarks.
From his website and this interview, Dr. Davis is not going to advance my interests if he is elected.
So who’s interests will he advance ?
Reviewing his most recent FEC filing of donations to his campaign reveals that 20% of his top contributors are in the medical field … donating 20% of the funds … and representing 17 states outside of Minnesota.
On the other hand, voters know where current First District Congressman Tim Walz stands on health care. His votes in support of SCHIP, Mental Health Parity, Veterans Care are well known … plus he has co-sponsored over 20 health care bills.
Dr. Davis’s prescription for health care is bad medicine.
Monday, July 07, 2008
MN-01 : Dr. Davis Donates $500 to get $5000 !
With the news that Dr. Brian Davis, the Republican endorsed candidate to be Minnesota’s First District Congressman, “raised $391,000 during the latest period, and finished with $376,000 in cash. His $100,000 loan comes on top of a $24,000 loan he made during the first quarter of the year.”
That got me thinking I wonder how much he supported previous candidates. Checking the OpenSecrets.org website, reveals no record of any contribution to any candidate in 2006. The website would report donations exceeding $200, so it is possible that Dr. Davis could have made donations less than that amount.
Interestingly, though three donations were made in 2007.
Brian Davis of Rochester MN 55902 gave $1050 on October 9, 2007 to the Republican Party of Minnesota.
Dr. Brian Davis, a Mayo Clinic/Doctor Rochester MN 55905 on April 30, 2007 gave $500 to American Society/Therapeutic Radiology.
Brian J Davis of Rochester MN 55902 on May 2, 2007 gave $500 to Rudolph W. Giuliani.
American Society/Therapeutic Radiology typically donates funds to influence legislation, so who they do give their money ?
Now, looking at the distributions from American Society/Therapeutic Radiology contributed $2,500 to Dr. Davis’ campaign.
UPDATE This post was orginally written before I found the FEC report which included the second quarter. On May 13, 2008, the American Society/Therapeutic Radiology gave an additional $2,500 for a grand total of $5,000.
In investing jargon, it’s called a 5-bagger. UPDATE 10-bagger.
A pretty good deal … especially since there is not a record of Dr. Davis making a contribution before he thought of running.
I wonder if Rudy G. will be coming to Minnesota for a Davis fundraiser … but then again Rudy’s stance on Gay and Abortion issues did not produce many votes in the Republican primary.
That got me thinking I wonder how much he supported previous candidates. Checking the OpenSecrets.org website, reveals no record of any contribution to any candidate in 2006. The website would report donations exceeding $200, so it is possible that Dr. Davis could have made donations less than that amount.
Interestingly, though three donations were made in 2007.
Brian Davis of Rochester MN 55902 gave $1050 on October 9, 2007 to the Republican Party of Minnesota.
Dr. Brian Davis, a Mayo Clinic/Doctor Rochester MN 55905 on April 30, 2007 gave $500 to American Society/Therapeutic Radiology.
Brian J Davis of Rochester MN 55902 on May 2, 2007 gave $500 to Rudolph W. Giuliani.
American Society/Therapeutic Radiology typically donates funds to influence legislation, so who they do give their money ?
Now, looking at the distributions from American Society/Therapeutic Radiology contributed $2,500 to Dr. Davis’ campaign.
UPDATE This post was orginally written before I found the FEC report which included the second quarter. On May 13, 2008, the American Society/Therapeutic Radiology gave an additional $2,500 for a grand total of $5,000.
In investing jargon, it’s called a 5-bagger. UPDATE 10-bagger.
A pretty good deal … especially since there is not a record of Dr. Davis making a contribution before he thought of running.
I wonder if Rudy G. will be coming to Minnesota for a Davis fundraiser … but then again Rudy’s stance on Gay and Abortion issues did not produce many votes in the Republican primary.
Sunday, July 06, 2008
Feeling Pain at the Pump ? Congress needs to pass the PUMP Act
Congresswoman Bachmann, Congressman Kline and Senator Norm Coleman, all seem to believe that by opening areas for drilling will reduce oil prices.
That may be true, but how long and how much ?
Guy Caruso of the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration said “Drilling in U.S. waters offshore would produce nothing for five or 10 years and even then only add a minimal amount of oil for the supplies. And so, in the year 2018, it would not knock more than a nickel off your gallon of gas.”
While ANWR and OCS may part of the solution, the emphasis on those proposals will take too long. Plus, no one mentions how much the royalties will be nor who will get those royalties (individual states or the US Treasury) nor if they will be subject to any cap.
At a hearing held by the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on June 23rd, Congressman Jay Inslee (D-WA) posed a timely question. Inslee forced witnesses to chose between opening up undeveloped Alaskan oil fields and increased government regulation. All panelists said regulation would have an immediate impact, whereas new Alaska oil would take years to affect the market.
The solution must address the abilities of speculators to impact the market price.
Don’t believe that speculators are driving the price?
Americans are consuming less (as of March highway travel is down 4.3% and the auto industry is seeing a dramatic drop in sales of SUVs and trucks as people look to more fuel efficient vehicles) but prices have continued to rise.
The Saudi petroleum minister, Ali I. Al-Naimi, said his country will reach the 9.7 million level by July (up from 9 million) and the Saudi government will invest in oil projects that would allow Saudi Arabia to have the capacity to produce 12.5 million barrels per day by the end of next year; yet prices have continued to go up.
So while our consumption is going down and world production is increasing, prices are rising.
To address the problem, the government needs to have all the tools it needs.
There are two types of oil futures speculation. Market trading takes place through the New York Mercantile Exchange and is overseen through the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). However, most oil futures speculation occurs “over-the-counter.” This speculation is conducted off of the market, without any regulation or oversight by the CFTC. The CFTC needs to have the manpower and mission to address this problem. It is not unreasonable that a 30% reduction in price could occur if the CFTC had greater control to collect trading data on foreign trading boards.
This legislation would make immediate impacts … not years.
Congress has a number of bills pending, but the most comprehensive was proposed by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) in the “Prevent Unfair Manipulation of Prices Act of 2008″ ( HR 6330 ) – aka the PUMP Act. It was initiated June 20 and already has bi-partisan support. There are 58 co-sponsors including Jim Oberstar (MN-08) and Tim Walz (MN-01) .
The Minnesota delegation needs to expedite the passage of this bill. It has been assigned to the Agriculture Committee where Collin Peterson (MN-07) is the chairman and Walz is a member. Peterson and Walz were effective earlier this year in the farm bill when Congress addressed the controversial “Enron loophole”; however that piece of legislation only closed the door to natural gas trades on unregulated exchanges - not oil trades.
Please contact your member of Congress to encourage them to become a co-sponsor of this legislation. If they do not wish to support it, then ask the question how they will address the speculators influence on the price of oil. Those that do not have a plan are the problem -- and those that only believe that drilling is the answer -- are dictating a decade of higher prices.
FYI - a companion bill has been introduced in the Senate - S 3185
Please encourage Senators Coleman and Klobuchar to support this bill. Once again, because their positions on the Agriculture Committee, they will be the first to address the legislation.
Regardless of your opinion on drilling, this legislation can only help.
That may be true, but how long and how much ?
Guy Caruso of the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration said “Drilling in U.S. waters offshore would produce nothing for five or 10 years and even then only add a minimal amount of oil for the supplies. And so, in the year 2018, it would not knock more than a nickel off your gallon of gas.”
While ANWR and OCS may part of the solution, the emphasis on those proposals will take too long. Plus, no one mentions how much the royalties will be nor who will get those royalties (individual states or the US Treasury) nor if they will be subject to any cap.
At a hearing held by the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on June 23rd, Congressman Jay Inslee (D-WA) posed a timely question. Inslee forced witnesses to chose between opening up undeveloped Alaskan oil fields and increased government regulation. All panelists said regulation would have an immediate impact, whereas new Alaska oil would take years to affect the market.
The solution must address the abilities of speculators to impact the market price.
Don’t believe that speculators are driving the price?
Americans are consuming less (as of March highway travel is down 4.3% and the auto industry is seeing a dramatic drop in sales of SUVs and trucks as people look to more fuel efficient vehicles) but prices have continued to rise.
The Saudi petroleum minister, Ali I. Al-Naimi, said his country will reach the 9.7 million level by July (up from 9 million) and the Saudi government will invest in oil projects that would allow Saudi Arabia to have the capacity to produce 12.5 million barrels per day by the end of next year; yet prices have continued to go up.
So while our consumption is going down and world production is increasing, prices are rising.
To address the problem, the government needs to have all the tools it needs.
There are two types of oil futures speculation. Market trading takes place through the New York Mercantile Exchange and is overseen through the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). However, most oil futures speculation occurs “over-the-counter.” This speculation is conducted off of the market, without any regulation or oversight by the CFTC. The CFTC needs to have the manpower and mission to address this problem. It is not unreasonable that a 30% reduction in price could occur if the CFTC had greater control to collect trading data on foreign trading boards.
This legislation would make immediate impacts … not years.
Congress has a number of bills pending, but the most comprehensive was proposed by Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) in the “Prevent Unfair Manipulation of Prices Act of 2008″ ( HR 6330 ) – aka the PUMP Act. It was initiated June 20 and already has bi-partisan support. There are 58 co-sponsors including Jim Oberstar (MN-08) and Tim Walz (MN-01) .
The Minnesota delegation needs to expedite the passage of this bill. It has been assigned to the Agriculture Committee where Collin Peterson (MN-07) is the chairman and Walz is a member. Peterson and Walz were effective earlier this year in the farm bill when Congress addressed the controversial “Enron loophole”; however that piece of legislation only closed the door to natural gas trades on unregulated exchanges - not oil trades.
Please contact your member of Congress to encourage them to become a co-sponsor of this legislation. If they do not wish to support it, then ask the question how they will address the speculators influence on the price of oil. Those that do not have a plan are the problem -- and those that only believe that drilling is the answer -- are dictating a decade of higher prices.
FYI - a companion bill has been introduced in the Senate - S 3185
Please encourage Senators Coleman and Klobuchar to support this bill. Once again, because their positions on the Agriculture Committee, they will be the first to address the legislation.
Regardless of your opinion on drilling, this legislation can only help.
Friday, July 04, 2008
MN-02 : Will John Kline respond to fuel prices and the DOD budget
Reflecting on this Independence Day has to make one think of the sacrifices that our military is making today and yesterday, but also an increased concern about tomorrow.
Independence Day may mark the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but it also a reminder of the efforts made by the Continental Army. The similarities to today’s military are appropriate … that Army was also a volunteer army … enlistment terms were extended to three years or "the length of the war".
Oh, yeah, it was also under-funded and under-equipped.
But today, that cannot be possible … could it ? ? ?
After all, President Bush signed the latest War Supplemental bill on June 30th stating
“We owe these brave Americans our gratitude. We owe them our unflinching support. And the best way to demonstrate that support is to give them the resources they need to do their jobs and to prevail. The bill I sign today does exactly that. It provides necessary funds to support our troops as they conduct military operations in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and in other theaters in the war on terror.”
So how long before the budget gets blown ?
How about July 1st !
From the Defense Energy Support Center, we learn that military units in Iraq and elsewhere will see another hike in fuel costs -- the second midyear increase because of soaring oil prices –- as the cost for refined fuel used by troops will jump from $127.68 a barrel to $170.94 — an astounding 34 percent jump in just six months and more than double what the Pentagon was paying three years ago.
And the Pentagon’s response … a $400,000 a month increase in fuel costs won't affect ongoing military operations, it will require a "reprioritization of daily support activities."
Wow !
Shades of Don Rumsfeld and his re-assuring response to a soldier who questioned the shortages of equipment : "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time."
Let’s face it, our military has been shortchanged since the beginning – from personal protection like body armor shortages to MRAP (the mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicle), DOD has done a poor job. There were stories of not enough tourniquets, as the Baltimore Sun reported in 2005, quoting one infantry surgeon, "There is no good reason why wounded soldiers are continuing to die on the battlefield from extremity bleeding." Parents had to send batteries … and even tampons (to be used to treat wounds.)
Plain and simple, the government has failed to ensure rapid acquisition capabilities … which could be caused by unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.
Add to that failings, consider that the House Armed Services Committee was appraised last September that $6 billion worth of military contracts are under criminal review and $9 billion unaccounted for. John Kline (MN-02), who sits on that Committee, reacted ”So I am doubly appalled, triply, quadruply appalled at this day at the horrific conduct of commissioned officers, at a clear breakdown in leadership. ”
Other programs are also being questioned due to higher costs and delayed times … such as the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) which the CBO estimates will grow 60% over budget and may be unaffordable in the long term given the many other pressing needs facing the United States Army.
So, what will the military do to combat this budget shortage ? How will it balance the short term needs and the long term priorities ?
My immediate concern is that the soldiers in the field will suffer.
The current Congress needs to take action. John Kline is Minnesota’s sole representative on the House Armed Services Committee and thus far, he has allowed President Bush to fund the war through deficit spending. The rise in gas prices may have been unexpected, but it is inexcusable that Kline has allowed Bush to submit budgets without fully funding the ongoing Iraq and Afghanistan operations.
DOD has problems, but Congress needs to step up. Kline has been in Congress long enough to see the problems and to have taken action. He has failed --- too many opportunities have been missed. Oversight has been lacking. He has failed to push for a streamlined procurement system.
Kline’s attitude is demonstrated by his comment - “Well that's just the situation we find ourselves in" - is not responsible.
Kline attitude is reminiscent of Rumsfeld’s … it’s time for someone that may be closer to current active duty - and military - needs.
Voters need to hear from Steve Sarvi and reprioritize who represents the Second District !
Independence Day may mark the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but it also a reminder of the efforts made by the Continental Army. The similarities to today’s military are appropriate … that Army was also a volunteer army … enlistment terms were extended to three years or "the length of the war".
Oh, yeah, it was also under-funded and under-equipped.
But today, that cannot be possible … could it ? ? ?
After all, President Bush signed the latest War Supplemental bill on June 30th stating
“We owe these brave Americans our gratitude. We owe them our unflinching support. And the best way to demonstrate that support is to give them the resources they need to do their jobs and to prevail. The bill I sign today does exactly that. It provides necessary funds to support our troops as they conduct military operations in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and in other theaters in the war on terror.”
So how long before the budget gets blown ?
How about July 1st !
From the Defense Energy Support Center, we learn that military units in Iraq and elsewhere will see another hike in fuel costs -- the second midyear increase because of soaring oil prices –- as the cost for refined fuel used by troops will jump from $127.68 a barrel to $170.94 — an astounding 34 percent jump in just six months and more than double what the Pentagon was paying three years ago.
And the Pentagon’s response … a $400,000 a month increase in fuel costs won't affect ongoing military operations, it will require a "reprioritization of daily support activities."
Wow !
Shades of Don Rumsfeld and his re-assuring response to a soldier who questioned the shortages of equipment : "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time."
Let’s face it, our military has been shortchanged since the beginning – from personal protection like body armor shortages to MRAP (the mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicle), DOD has done a poor job. There were stories of not enough tourniquets, as the Baltimore Sun reported in 2005, quoting one infantry surgeon, "There is no good reason why wounded soldiers are continuing to die on the battlefield from extremity bleeding." Parents had to send batteries … and even tampons (to be used to treat wounds.)
Plain and simple, the government has failed to ensure rapid acquisition capabilities … which could be caused by unnecessary layers of bureaucracy.
Add to that failings, consider that the House Armed Services Committee was appraised last September that $6 billion worth of military contracts are under criminal review and $9 billion unaccounted for. John Kline (MN-02), who sits on that Committee, reacted ”So I am doubly appalled, triply, quadruply appalled at this day at the horrific conduct of commissioned officers, at a clear breakdown in leadership. ”
Other programs are also being questioned due to higher costs and delayed times … such as the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS) which the CBO estimates will grow 60% over budget and may be unaffordable in the long term given the many other pressing needs facing the United States Army.
So, what will the military do to combat this budget shortage ? How will it balance the short term needs and the long term priorities ?
My immediate concern is that the soldiers in the field will suffer.
The current Congress needs to take action. John Kline is Minnesota’s sole representative on the House Armed Services Committee and thus far, he has allowed President Bush to fund the war through deficit spending. The rise in gas prices may have been unexpected, but it is inexcusable that Kline has allowed Bush to submit budgets without fully funding the ongoing Iraq and Afghanistan operations.
DOD has problems, but Congress needs to step up. Kline has been in Congress long enough to see the problems and to have taken action. He has failed --- too many opportunities have been missed. Oversight has been lacking. He has failed to push for a streamlined procurement system.
Kline’s attitude is demonstrated by his comment - “Well that's just the situation we find ourselves in" - is not responsible.
Kline attitude is reminiscent of Rumsfeld’s … it’s time for someone that may be closer to current active duty - and military - needs.
Voters need to hear from Steve Sarvi and reprioritize who represents the Second District !
Thursday, July 03, 2008
MN-01 : Did Dr. Davis Talk to Congressman Cole about Pay Cuts ?
Representative Tom Cole (R-OK) is coming to Minnesota on Thursday, July 3rd with scheduled appearances on behalf of Sixth District Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06) and Republican endorsed First District candidate Dr. Brian Davis.
Externally, there will be much discussion about gas prices and the suggestion by Democrats to tax the oil companies. Bachmann contends any effort to tax oil companies will only backfire on the consumers. "Taxes are passed through, that's what businesses have to do, so it will be the American people that will pay and the price will continue to shoot up at the pump."
Hopefully, Internal discussions will be on another subject that is on Congress’ legislative calendar and also one that effects more than 44 million Americans directly and the rest of us indirectly.
That would be a Health Care costs.
Recently, the House had a chance to vote on the H.R. 6331: Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. At hand was a 10.6% cut in Medicare’s payments to doctors. To compensate for this payment, the bill proposed trimming costs in the Medicare Advantage program. The basic question was whether the health care for the elderly and disabled should be shouldered by insurance companies or physicians. Overwhelmingly, the bill was approved 355 to 59 with Representatives Bachmann and Cole supporting the insurance companies.
Here’s the question for Congresswoman Bachmann, will the doctors respond - just as you suggest the oil companies would - and raise their fees to other groups … that would be me and everyone else not on Medicare. As a physician, Dr. Davis, who reported a salary of $411,720 in 2007 may be impacted if he accepts Medicare eligible patients. What would Dr. Davis recommend to his colleagues? The American Medical Association warned that smaller paydays would give doctors an incentive to stop taking Medicare patients. Further this is a political issue as it may hit politicians right where it hurts … in campaign contributions and support by Seniors. The Texas Medical Association Political Action Committee abruptly rescinded its endorsement of Senator John Cornyn after he failed to support the doctors in the Senate vote.
Why would this bill so be passed so overwhelmingly in the House but be stalled in the Senate. Obviously, the strength of the Insurance lobby versus the AMA lobby is at the crux. The House looked at it without the blinders of lobbyists and instead with a look toward fiscal sanity. After all, Medicare Advantage program, which uses private insurers; and these health plans get net payments that are approximately 12 percent higher than traditional Medicare's per capita costs. Duh, it should not be a battle between lobbyists but instead a vote for fiscally responsible government. PAYGO should be the Bible in every piece of legislation.
No doubt that we can all see the “pain at the pump” every time a gas station is passed. And we know that gas that was just under three dollars a year ago is now at the four dollar mark. Yet, the increase in health care insurance is not visible to everyone. Some may have coverage through work, some may decide they cannot afford it, and there are those of us who are self-insured. My insurance company notified me that my next renewal premium would be raised $104 … that’s per month … or $1248 per year. Trust me, my vehicles do not use that much gas in a year … and that is just the increase. This “pain” is not as evident as the seen at the “pump” but it is real. If your employer provides insurance, they are seeing the same impact. With gas, I have a few things I can do --- maintain my vehicle properly, consolidate trips, reduce trips, walk, etc --- but my choice for health insurance is limited. Pay it or chance it. In Fargo today, Barak Obama stated that the impact caused by the uninsured is $900 per year … that is borne by the others in higher premiums.
The insurance industry has found the southern Minnesota media market a relatively inexpensive buy and in the past have launched print ads in papers like the Mankato Free Press, television ads and radio ads targeting Congressman Tim Walz. Walz has stood by his convictions and continued to vote in support of SCHIP and Medicare programs. NOTE : Walz’s vote in favor of SCHIP while Bachmann and Cole opposed.
Congressmen are not “one issue” representatives … although Davis may want to talk about today’s issue-de jour – gas prices and drilling -- voters are concerned about a lot of other issues … the national debt, the Global War on Terrorism, jobs, global warming (Dr. Davis has already spoken on that issue "Let me be clear: I totally reject the man-made global warming religion,"), but Health Care is at the tops of everyone’s concerns.
Voters need to know where Dr. Davis stands on this important issue. Is he part of the Bachmann / Cole insurance-backing crowd --- or part of the Doctor-backing crowd --- or is he a visionary that believes there is a better system where insurance companies are not dictating doctor services and citizens can receive preventative and needed medical care at a reasonable price.
Externally, there will be much discussion about gas prices and the suggestion by Democrats to tax the oil companies. Bachmann contends any effort to tax oil companies will only backfire on the consumers. "Taxes are passed through, that's what businesses have to do, so it will be the American people that will pay and the price will continue to shoot up at the pump."
Hopefully, Internal discussions will be on another subject that is on Congress’ legislative calendar and also one that effects more than 44 million Americans directly and the rest of us indirectly.
That would be a Health Care costs.
Recently, the House had a chance to vote on the H.R. 6331: Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act of 2008. At hand was a 10.6% cut in Medicare’s payments to doctors. To compensate for this payment, the bill proposed trimming costs in the Medicare Advantage program. The basic question was whether the health care for the elderly and disabled should be shouldered by insurance companies or physicians. Overwhelmingly, the bill was approved 355 to 59 with Representatives Bachmann and Cole supporting the insurance companies.
Here’s the question for Congresswoman Bachmann, will the doctors respond - just as you suggest the oil companies would - and raise their fees to other groups … that would be me and everyone else not on Medicare. As a physician, Dr. Davis, who reported a salary of $411,720 in 2007 may be impacted if he accepts Medicare eligible patients. What would Dr. Davis recommend to his colleagues? The American Medical Association warned that smaller paydays would give doctors an incentive to stop taking Medicare patients. Further this is a political issue as it may hit politicians right where it hurts … in campaign contributions and support by Seniors. The Texas Medical Association Political Action Committee abruptly rescinded its endorsement of Senator John Cornyn after he failed to support the doctors in the Senate vote.
Why would this bill so be passed so overwhelmingly in the House but be stalled in the Senate. Obviously, the strength of the Insurance lobby versus the AMA lobby is at the crux. The House looked at it without the blinders of lobbyists and instead with a look toward fiscal sanity. After all, Medicare Advantage program, which uses private insurers; and these health plans get net payments that are approximately 12 percent higher than traditional Medicare's per capita costs. Duh, it should not be a battle between lobbyists but instead a vote for fiscally responsible government. PAYGO should be the Bible in every piece of legislation.
No doubt that we can all see the “pain at the pump” every time a gas station is passed. And we know that gas that was just under three dollars a year ago is now at the four dollar mark. Yet, the increase in health care insurance is not visible to everyone. Some may have coverage through work, some may decide they cannot afford it, and there are those of us who are self-insured. My insurance company notified me that my next renewal premium would be raised $104 … that’s per month … or $1248 per year. Trust me, my vehicles do not use that much gas in a year … and that is just the increase. This “pain” is not as evident as the seen at the “pump” but it is real. If your employer provides insurance, they are seeing the same impact. With gas, I have a few things I can do --- maintain my vehicle properly, consolidate trips, reduce trips, walk, etc --- but my choice for health insurance is limited. Pay it or chance it. In Fargo today, Barak Obama stated that the impact caused by the uninsured is $900 per year … that is borne by the others in higher premiums.
The insurance industry has found the southern Minnesota media market a relatively inexpensive buy and in the past have launched print ads in papers like the Mankato Free Press, television ads and radio ads targeting Congressman Tim Walz. Walz has stood by his convictions and continued to vote in support of SCHIP and Medicare programs. NOTE : Walz’s vote in favor of SCHIP while Bachmann and Cole opposed.
Congressmen are not “one issue” representatives … although Davis may want to talk about today’s issue-de jour – gas prices and drilling -- voters are concerned about a lot of other issues … the national debt, the Global War on Terrorism, jobs, global warming (Dr. Davis has already spoken on that issue "Let me be clear: I totally reject the man-made global warming religion,"), but Health Care is at the tops of everyone’s concerns.
Voters need to know where Dr. Davis stands on this important issue. Is he part of the Bachmann / Cole insurance-backing crowd --- or part of the Doctor-backing crowd --- or is he a visionary that believes there is a better system where insurance companies are not dictating doctor services and citizens can receive preventative and needed medical care at a reasonable price.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![Vote 60](http://img%20src=http://img.inkfrog.com/pix/ravendog/clic.gif%20border=”0"){kind=link}