Friday, February 26, 2010

No Climate Bill In 2010

InvestorsBusinessDailyLogo.jpgIn an article by Ed Carson that includes embedded video of our Tom Borelli, Investors Business Daily's "Capital Hill" Politics and markets blog is reporting that President Obama will fail to get his climate legislation adopted by the Senate this year.

This failure could turn out to be the best thing the Obama Administration ever does to reduce unemployment.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 4:30 PM

Thursday, February 18, 2010

National Center's Tom Borelli Discusses Corporate Retreat from Cap-and-Trade on Fox Business Network's "Cavuto" This Friday

IMPORTANT UPDATE: This interview has now been cancelled.

Tom Borelli, director of the National Center's Free Enterprise Project, is scheduled to appear on the Fox Business Network's "Cavuto" program on Friday, February 19 at 6:00 PM eastern.

Tom has been asked to talk about the recent defection of several corporations from the business-special interest USCAP lobby coalition. A key player in the push for the Obama Administration's cap-and-trade energy tax agenda, five businesses were reported to have abandoned their USCAP memberships this week.

Tom personally took on the leaders of many of these same corporations for their USCAP membership at past shareholder meetings.

National Center press releases on this major development in global warming politics can be found here and here.

Check your local listings for Fox Business Network on cable. Fox Business Network is available on channel 117 on Fios, channel 206 on Dish Network and channel 359 on DirecTV.

This post was written by David Almasi, executive director of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected].

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by David W. Almasi at 4:29 PM

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Deneen Borelli Debates Al Sharpton on Jobs

In case you missed it -- video of Project 21's Deneen Borelli debating Al Sharpton about the President Obama/Majority Leader Harry Reid jobs bill.

The debate was on the Fox News Channel's Fox and Friends on February 12, 2010.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:18 AM

Sunday, February 07, 2010

Video: Deneen Borelli on Jobs, Tea Parties on Fox

For those who missed it, here's the video of Deneen Borelli on Fox and Friends this morning, discussing President Obama's jobs agenda, tea parties and more.

Hat tip: Thanks to WebsurferguyMN for uploading it to YouTube.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:33 PM

Wednesday, February 03, 2010

Tom Borelli Talks with Gordon Liddy about New SEC Climate Regulations


Our Free Enterprise Project Director Tom Borelli visited with G. Gordon Liddy the other day to discuss the Securities and Exchange Commission's new rule requiring publicly-held corporations to disclose the risks of global warming -- including the risks to their corporation of stupid laws and regulations Congress and/or the Administration adopt in a futile attempt to control the climate.

The SEC did not use the word "stupid" -- that's mine -- but really, even the backers of this stuff agree it won't change the climate, so what's the point?

Enough editorializing from me. You can listen to Gordon interview Tom here, or go here. (Note: Tom's interview is during the last quarter-hour of the linked podcast file.)

For a quick look at what Tom's talking about, below is our press release on the matter:
Another Blow to Obama's Agenda: New SEC Guidance on Climate Change Disclosure Will Force CEOs Who Lobby for Cap-and-Trade to Expose the Business Risk of Cap-and-Trade Legislation to Shareholders

Washington D.C. - Corporate CEOs who have been actively lobbying for cap-and-trade climate legislation may soon find themselves in an embarrassing position thanks to a new Securities and Exchange Commission regulation, says Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center for Public Policy Research's Free Enterprise Project.

The SEC voted January 27 to provide public companies with interpretive guidance that encourages corporations to disclose the possible business and legal impact of climate change to shareholders. Full disclosure will require companies to assess and describe how cap-and-trade legislation can harm company earnings.

"Fully disclosing the business risk of cap-and-trade will embarrass many CEOs who are lobbying for emissions regulations. Shareholders will discover that these CEOs are pursuing legislation that will negatively impact their company," said Borelli.

By issuing interpretive guidance on climate change, the SEC is encouraging companies to fully describe a wide range of business and legal risks posed by climate change on business operations. In these communications with shareholders about business risk, the SEC wants companies to address the following areas: Impact of Legislation and Regulation, Impact of International Accords, Indirect Consequences of Regulation or Business Trends, and Physical Impacts of Climate Change.

"Finally, the SEC is taking a position on the business risk of climate change regulation. Through Congressional testimony and participation at shareholder meetings over the past few years, I've been calling on CEOs to assess and disclose the regulatory impact of cap-and-trade to shareholders. While CEOs find it easy to ignore an individual shareholder, they can't ignore the SEC," said Borelli.

"Shareholders are going to discover that many CEOs have not been forthcoming about the business risk posed by cap-and-trade legislation and that they have failed to exercise their fiduciary responsibility by not assessing and communicating the impact of emissions regulations on their businesses."

Borelli cites Caterpillar CEO Jim Owens as an executive who has arrogantly disregarded the business risk of cap-and-trade. At a shareholder meeting, Owens admitted he did not conduct a cost benefit analysis of cap-and-trade on his business before he joined the United States Climate Action Partnership – a lobbying organization pursuing these carbon dioxide emission limits.

In a subsequent Caterpillar shareholder meeting, when challenged by Borelli, Owens agreed that carbon caps could hurt heavy industry in the U.S., including Caterpillar. When Borelli asked how Owens could be held accountable if his lobbying course backfired on Caterpillar shareholders, Owens told Borelli to sell his stock.

Economic studies on the impact of cap-and-trade consistently report that capping emissions will lead to job losses and slower economic growth -- developments that would negatively impact earnings of large cap corporations.

"Caterpillar currently identifies general economic conditions and the amount of mining and manufacturing activity as key risk factors for its business, yet the company fails to warn investors that cap-and-trade will lead to a reduction in economic growth and a significant decrease in coal mining. Disclosure on climate change regulation will expose the conflict between cap-and-trade and shareholder interests," added Borelli.

"Armed with this information, Caterpillar shareholders will demand to know why Owens is lobbying for a law that will harm their investment. With the new disclosure detailing how cap-and-trade will harm Caterpillar, perhaps shareholders will follow Owens' advice and sell the stock," said Borelli.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:56 PM

Friday, January 29, 2010

Tom Borelli to Appear on Varney & Co on Fox Business Channel Friday


Tom Borelli, senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research and director of our Free Enterprise Project, will appear on Stuart Varney's "Varney and Co." show on the Fox Business Network Friday morning at 10 AM 10:30 AM Eastern.

Tom will discuss new guidelines issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission that may have an interesting impact on the climate change debate.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:23 AM

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Note to Project 21 Fans: Glenn Beck Rebroadcast of Most Recent Show Featuring Project 21 Members

GlennBeckLogoThe Fox News Channel is rebroadcasting, right this minute, the second of two Beck shows featuring a discussion with black conservatives (including Project 21 members).

If you can't catch it on the Fox News Channel for whatever reason, Booker Rising (a website I often visit, but don't mention as much as I should) has made available the video of the entire show, which is entitled "A Time To Be Heard."

We also posted on this blog the segments of the show featuring Project 21 members. Go here to watch Lisa Fritsch; go here to watch full-time Project 21 Fellow Deneen Borelli on the "A Time To Be Heard" Glenn Beck broadcast.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 3:01 PM

Monday, January 18, 2010

Project 21's Deneen Borelli Talks Green Jobs on Glenn Beck

In case you missed it from Friday...

Project 21 full-time fellow Deneen Borelli talks about the fantasy of economic empowerment through radical environmental policies on the January 14, 2010 broadcast of the Glenn Beck program on the Fox News Channel.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:44 PM

Saturday, January 16, 2010

Tom Borelli Discusses Climategate, Greening of California on Glenn Beck

Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of our Free Enterprise Project, was on the Glenn Beck Show Friday with Eric Bolling, guest host, discussing both the granting of economic stimulus funds to Climategate scientist Michael Mann and also Arnold Schwartzenegger's efforts to "green" California.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 10:38 PM

Sunday, December 20, 2009

From Hopenhagen to Nopenhagen

Copenhagen, Denmark - The climate change conference in Copenhagen adopted a new, bold, historic agreement...

... to continue to talk. Wow, and accomplished in just two weeks!

The last-minute deal, helped along by our deal-closer-in-chief Barack Obama, was three-pages long (not counting appendices) and included a number of non-binding commitments, including...
* The U.S. and other developed countries will help raise $100 billion per year by 2020 to help developing nations with climate change mitigation and adaptation. In return, these nations agreed to accept the cash. The cash specifies on that "[m]itigation actions... be subject to... domestic measurement, reporting and verification."

* Developed nations also agreed to provide some $30 billion in aid between 2010 and 2012, with the U.S. pledging $3.6 billion of that amount.

* China and other developing countries agreed to what is being widely reported as international verification of their action to address climate change, but they agreed to do nothing of the kind. The agreement calls for the establishment of "guidelines" for international "consultations and analysis," but significantly, no international verification. And, lest there be any doubt that China won't tolerate such verification, the agreement specifies the guidelines it issues "will ensure that national sovereignty is respected."

* China, now the world's largest emitter of carbon, agreed to cut its "carbon intensity" by between 40% and 45% by 2020. Sounds good, doesn't it? But there's a difference between reducing carbon intensity (the amount of carbon emitted per dollar of GDP) and overall carbon reduction, which the U.S., EU and other large emitters committed to undertaking. India, too, vowed only to reduce its carbon intensity by between 20% and 25% by 2020. Both countries could meet these targets and still see their emissions grow substantially.

* State parties agreed to a goal of limiting global warming by 2 degrees Celsius, but as the above makes plain, they didn't establish a blue print – certainly not one that is binding to achieve this goal.
Obama hasn't had such a stunning success in Copenhagen since he closed the deal for Chicago to host the next Olympic games. Oh right - scratch that.

Though the climate summit was a spectacular failure for President Obama, it was a great victory for the American people.

The Heritage Foundation estimates that the imposition of the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade regime, the type of system most likely to be imposed to ensure the U.S. meets its carbon reduction targets under a binding treaty, would destroy an average of 1.15 million jobs every year between 2012 and 2030. So President Obama's failure to deliver a treaty may have been his single biggest contribution to fighting unemployment in the United States.

Even if he didn't mean to do it.

Written by David A. Ridenour, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. Write the author at [email protected]. As we occasionally reprint letters on the blog, please note if you prefer that your correspondence be kept private, or only published anonymously.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by David A. Ridenour at 12:05 AM

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Media Matters Tries to Blame Climategate on Exxon Mobil, Fails Utterly

MediaMattersActionNetworkLogo.jpgThe Media Matters Action Network has a page up claiming we at the National Center for Public Policy Research are "doing everything in [our] power" to draw "attention to the so-called 'Climategate' scandal" and implying that the fact that Exxon Mobil has donated to us is the reason.

What dishonest dopes. We've barely touched on Climategate. A few sentences here and there. In fact, given the gravity of the scandal, we really should have done more.

Media Matters is trying to claim it is relevant that handful of groups that have in the past received funding from Exxon Mobil have mentioned Climategate, which is a huge, major story (not broken by any of these groups, incidentally) repeatedly covered by every major newspaper in the English-speaking world and in many many newspapers and other media elsewhere. Hello? Are all the major papers in Britain, including the openly left-wing Guardian and its most famous ultra-green columnist (who takes Climategate very seriously indeed), in the pockets of Exxon Mobil?

Sorry, Media Matters, your desperate ploy won't work. Climategate has shown the unreliability and unprofessionalism of some Ph.Ds the U.N.'s IPCC and other organizations -- including yours, Media Matters -- have relied on for many years to help prove to the world that massive job-killing, government-growing treaties and policies are necessary. This is YOUR scandal, not ours, and even if you put a nice pretty red bow on it, we aren't going to accept it from you as a gift.

Yes, Exxon Mobil has contributed to us and we appreciate its support as we do the support we receive from any of our 100,000+ supporters. (Without Exxon Mobil, the whopping approximately 1.5 percent of our annual revenue that comes from corporate sources would be a little smaller. How much corporate support do you get, Media Matters?)

But Exxon Mobil's funding does not specifically support our work on climate nor has the corporation suggested in any way, shape or form that we mention, promote, acknowledge or otherwise notice Climategate, a scandal that is getting worldwide attention because it is newsworthy.

And we remind Media Matters that the only reason Media Matters knows about Exxon Mobil's gifts to public policy institutions is because Exxon Mobil and many of the recipient foundations (including us) freely and voluntarily disclose this information. (Does Media Matters CEO David Brock voluntarily disclose which corporations and special interests help pay for his nearly $300,000 salary?)

Which reminds me. Media Matters found eight public policy groups that have received at least one contribution from Exxon Mobil since 2001 that either have mentioned Climategate or, in the case of one, are affiliated with an individual who wrote a story about Climategate in an unaffiliated opinion journal (wow, there's a smoking gun for you). Here's a seven-page list of all the public policy institutions that received gifts from Exxon Mobil in 2008 alone. Over 130 institutions, some of them very liberal, are listed, and yet Media Matters could only find eight public policy groups receiving such gifts since 2001 that have mentioned Climategate or work with someone who has? Only eight?

P.S. to Media Matters: Have you guys apologized yet for promoting environmentally-useless climate policies that can hurt people based on unverifiable information? People really do rely on the jobs you want to kill, you know.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:14 AM

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Obama Must Nix Cap-and-Trade If He Cares About Jobs, Says Deneen Borelli on Fox

If you weren't watching the Fox News Channel at 7:15 AM Sunday morning you missed Deneen Borelli explain how cap-and-trade would lead to more unemployment, but thanks to the magic of online video, we have her interview here:

Thanks to YouTube user WebsurferguyMN for posting the video on YouTube.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 11:25 PM

Deneen Borelli on Fox Sunday

FoxNewsLogoProject 21 full-time fellow Deneen Borelli will be a guest on the Fox News Channel on Sunday, December 6 at 7:15 AM Eastern, discussing what President Obama should -- and should not -- do if he really wants to see the jobs situation in the U.S. improve.

You can read more about Deneen's views on the subject in
this Dallas Morning News op-ed.

E-mail comments to [email protected]. | Subscribe to feed. | Follow the National Center for Public Policy Research on Twitter. | Download Shattered Lives: 100 Victims of Government Health Care.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 1:03 AM

Tuesday, June 09, 2009

Barack Obama's Just Making Stuff Up

Bill McGurn of the Wall Street Journal writes: "Something's wrong when the president invokes a formula that makes it impossible for him to be wrong and it goes largely unchallenged."

Not quite. Two things are wrong. The White House shouldn't be making stuff up, and the media should be challenging the President over it.

Heck, according to the article, even the Democratic Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, is exposing the White House on this. If liberal Democrats can do it, why can't the media?

I'm sure some reporters are too dumb to realize they're being lied to flat-out, but surely not all of them are idiots.

What's the point of us paying the price of a newspaper if the President can lie and the media doesn't notice?

Go to Bill McGurn's article for the full story.

P.S. If you don't have a Wall Street Journal subscription and you're wondering what President Obama made up, it's a fake figure for the number of jobs his so-called "stimulus" spending bill has "saved." As the article explains, there's no measurement for anything like that. The White House had to have made it up.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at [email protected].
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Labels: , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 12:16 AM

Monday, June 01, 2009

Outrage of the Day: Political Decisionmaking at Government Motors

From "Lawmakers Seek to Influence Plant Locations" by Neil King, Jr. and Kate Linebaugh for the June 2 Wall Street Journal:
The Obama administration has said repeatedly that it won't use its majority stake in General Motors Corp. to meddle in the company's daily affairs. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill aren't being so shy.

The areas of potential concern to lawmakers range from proposed plant and dealership closings to longer-term plans for more fuel-efficient cars. And key elected officials are already promising to weigh in even as President Barack Obama and his aides say they will shield GM from outside pressure.

"I think members will express themselves for sure. We should do that," said Rep. Sandy Levin, a Michigan Democrat whose district lies just north of Detroit. "We should express the interests of our constituents."

...Lawmakers have already shown they have muscle with GM, and they aren't likely to back off now. Members of the Michigan delegation rebelled last month when word got out that GM, post-bankruptcy, planned to boost its imports of cars made at GM factories in China. As a result, GM agreed as part of its talks with the United Auto Workers union to reopen two idled plants by 2011 to manufacture as many as 160,000 compact cars a year.

Rep. Gary Peters, a Michigan Democrat whose district north of Detroit includes three plants set to cease production, is one of many lawmakers in the region who want the refitted plants in their backyard.

He has backing from Democratic Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who said Monday that she is going to be "aggressive" about trying to snare a facility that will help keep some automotive jobs in the state, which has the highest unemployment rate in the country.

Ms. Granholm, besides countless television appearances pleading for aid, has made about a dozen trips to Washington to meet with Mr. Obama, the president's automotive task force and dozens of other officials...

"I think where GM builds its next plant is going to be more of a political decision than a business decision," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra, a Republican from western Michigan. "For the foreseeable future, these car companies will be run by the Obama administration, and it will not be arm's length."...
Lawmakers care about their own prominence and re-electability, not profitability. They are not going to run General Motors successfully. Mostly (as is obvious from the priorities stated by the Congressmen in the article above, and by such things as the adoption of legislation forcing automakers to meet unrealistic and anti-family mileage standards), they aren't even going to try.

General Motors didn't stay competitive. Even hundreds of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars won't change that fact.

If the U.S. government actually wanted to help the domestic car business, Congress and the Administration would repeal mileage standards (which kill Americans as well as car companies), stop pro-union public policies and get the government out of car company management and ownership immediately.

The government isn't doing any of those things.

E-mail any comments to the National Center for Public Policy Research at [email protected].
Subscribe to this blog's feed.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 11:00 PM

Monday, March 16, 2009

Outrage of the Day: Waxman Drags Feet on Needed CPSIA Reform

Today's Outrage of the Day to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), for his refusal to hold hearings on the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), legislation adopted last year (see this blog's prior coverage here and here) that has forced charities and thrift shops to toss out large volumes of used clothing and other goods, caused used bookstores to toss out children's books published before 1985, halted sales of dirt bikes, handmade toys and other children's goods, and more.

Congress adopted this law in apparent response to widespread reports of children ingesting dirt bike parts.

No, not really. Congress adopted adopted this law in part because it has no idea what it is doing (that's what happens when lawmakers vote on bills no one has read, coming from an ideological bias that the bigger government grows, the better we'll be), but that's no excuse for not revisiting the issue now that the truth is kicking many people in the teeth.

Every day this law remains unreformed, jobs get killed and books (some of which are irreplaceable) get tossed away.

You can tell that to Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), though, chairman of the House Committee with jurisdiction, and he'll tell you he'll get to it later.

As Walter Olson put it on his Overlawyered blog:
...Waxman, for his part, has announced his intent to hold no hearing on the law until the Obama Administration installs a new chair at the Consumer Product Safety Commission. That serves the multiple functions of 1) stalling (while more small enterprises are driven out of business and thus are neutralized as political threats); 2) reinforcing the impression that the ball is in someone else’s court on addressing the law’s harms; 3) assisting in orchestrating whatever hearing is eventually held, since he expects an ally of his own to be installed as CPSC chair...
So now, as Overlawyered reports it, ordinary citizens are now planning their own "people's hearing" on the matter, hoping through direct action to get some relief.

It shouldn't be necessary. Congress made a huge mistake. It should admit it, and fix it.

For more on this, visit Overlawyered's CPSIA tag.

Hat tip (as if you couldn't guess):

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 2:12 PM

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

First They Banned All the Books

Though in this particular revolution, it appears they are starting with children's books published before 1985.

Possibly that's to get us used to the idea.

To be fair, though, Congress didn't only vote to ban books. The legislation behind this, the Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act of 2008, also eviscerates a significant chunk of our nation's cultural heritage, kills jobs (see the links below for stories about what this is doing to some small businesses), and hurts charities.

(If you hadn't yet heard that used bookstores, thrift shops and other establishments have begun throwing out large numbers of children's books, as well as children's clothes, toys and other goods, read this article by the Manhattan Institute's Walter Olson, and then head over to his superlative website,, for more details and updates.)

I checked to see if our fearless leader voted for this bill, but he blew off the vote entirely. His chief-of-staff Rahm Emmanuel, then an Illinois Congressman, was an original co-sponsor in the House, and Rep. Bobby Rush, also of Illinois, was the main sponsor.

In the Senate, the only "no" votes were: Allard (R-CO), Barrasso (R-WY), Bunning (R-KY), Burr (R-NC), Coburn (R-OK), Cochran (R-MS), Corker (R-TN), DeMint (R-SC), Ensign (R-NV), Enzi (R-WY), Kyl (R-AZ), Vitter (R-LA) and Wicker (R-MS).)

Folks, this is what big government gets you. Brace yourselves for more.

P.S. If you sell used clothes on EBay, yard sales, etc., beware. The penalty for breaking this law is fines up to $100,000, prison time, or both. You don't have to harm anyone to go to prison.

Hat tip: Ace of Spades.

Labels: , , , , ,

Posted by Amy Ridenour at 3:53 PM

Copyright The National Center for Public Policy Research