Voice For Liberty

Tag: United States Congress

  • Tiahrt gains endorsement of Rick Santorum

    Yesterday former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum appeared in Wichita to endorse the candidacy of Todd Tiahrt for the Republican party nomination for the Senate.

    Santorum said he’s not often taken time to travel to help candidates, especially in primary elections. Referring to the “critical juncture” that he believes our country faces, with a president and Congress that are grabbing power through health care and cap-and-trade legislation, he said we need a solid conservative in the Senate to oppose Obama and the Democrats in Washington.

    Todd Tiahrt, he said, has a great conservative record of not only opposing bad things, but “coming forward with good, solid, principled conservative ideas to solve problems not just here in Kansas, but across this country.”

    Answering a question about the differences on the issues between Tiahrt and Jerry Moran, his primary election opponent, Santorum said “Todd speaks out.” He’s been a strong economic conservative who believes in limited government, understanding that markets solve problems better than government. He also said Tiahrt recognizes a strong military is needed to protect America’s security.

    On the future of the health care bill in the U.S. Senate, Santorum said it’s going to take some time to work through the Senate, and the current bill that contains the public option will be tough to pass, given Senator Joe Lieberman’s stated opposition to such a bill. The Senate is unlike the House, he said, as in the Senate, one member can block passage of legislation.

    Referring to the unpopularity of Obama’s programs, particularly the health care bill, Santorum said that in many respects, Obama has already sacrificed his majorities in Congress. The election of 2008 was not a realignment, he said, but a rejection of incompetence of the last administration.

    On Obama’s absence from the ceremonies marking the anniversary of the end of the Berlin Wall, Santorum said “He is insensitive to the importance of our traditional allies.” The tyrannies that we fought in the past — the Soviet Union — are now appearing in different parts of the globe. Their motivations are different, but we must confront the same evil. “Going to Berlin and standing where Reagan stood would identify him [Obama] with policies he doesn’t agree with.”

  • Alan Keyes to speak at events in Wichita

    Alan Keyes, former Reagan administration diplomat, National Security Council member, and presidential candidate, will speak at two events in Wichita supporting the Anderson for Congress campaign. Dr. Keyes will headline a public speech at the Beech Activity Center, 9710 E. Central, on Saturday November 21st at 7:15 pm titled “We the People”. General admittance is $10, children 16 and under are free. Special reserve seating and a pre-speech VIP reception with Dr. Keyes is available for $50.

    Dr. Keyes will host a fundraiser on Monday November 23rd, 7:00 pm at Larkspur restaurant and grill, 904 E. Douglas in Old Town. The cost is $100 per plate, $175 includes a private reception with Dr. Keyes prior to the dinner. All proceeds from both events benefit Anderson for Congress.

    For more information, call 316-636-9300 or info@anderson4congress.com.

  • Citizen lawsuits won’t enhance chemical safety

    Legislation currently under consideration in Congress will allow citizens to sue the Department of Homeland Security if they believe that chemical plants are not in compliance with new regulations.

    The new regulations — IST, or Inherently Safer Technology — are troubling enough, in that they may actually work against their stated goal of safety. Allowing citizens to bring lawsuits based on these regulations will create many problems.

    In a Washington Times piece, two Washington lawmakers explain the risks and dangers that this law will bring about:

    • “… civil lawsuits would necessitate DHS diverting its limited resources from its core mission — protecting American lives from terrorists.”
    • “… civil lawsuits, and the discovery process involved, could very well lead to the public disclosure of sensitive — even classified — security information about U.S. chemical facilities and DHS’ assessments of those facilities.”
    • “To allow civil lawsuits against DHS in this area has the real potential to make the American people less safe. DHS itself has warned Congress of the potential consequences.”

    The Endangered Species Act contains provisions that allow for citizen lawsuits. The result? The authors write: “As a result, biologists then divert their attention away from protecting species to responding to the lawsuit and reacting to any judicial decisions. In 2002, this brought the Fish and Wildlife Service to a standstill.”

    Let’s not saddle the Department of Homeland Security with the same burden.

  • Chemical plant security should be based on technology, not politics

    As Congress considers legislation that would force our nation’s chemical plants to make expensive changes in their processes and technologies, we need to make sure that we don’t cripple our economy just to appease a small group of environmental activists — all in the name of purportedly greater safety.

    That’s the danger we face from IST, or Inherently Safer Technology. What could be wrong with a law that contains such a noble goal as safety? It has to do with the complexity of a modern industrial economy providing the backdrop on which unintended consequences develop. A recent article in The Hill explains:

    IST is governed by the laws of physics and engineering, not the laws of politics and emotion. A reduction in hazard will result in a reduction in risk if, and only if, that hazard is not displaced or replaced by another hazard. Even if it were possible to simply switch from one chemical to another, switching often results in the mere transfer of risk from the chemical plant to some other entity, perhaps the surrounding community, with no actual risk-reduction registered. For example, a government mandate that forces a company to reduce the amount of a particular chemical at a facility could very well result in an increase in transportation and safety risk. The company still has to maintain the same level of production capacity and the only way to maintain current capacity is to increase the number of shipments — through the community — going into the chemical plant.

    The article also states that there’s no objective way to measure the notion of “inherently safer.” But there is an objective way to measure the costs that IST will impose on manufacturers and our economy. It’s a huge cost, both in terms of dollars and lost jobs. Even the Wichita water treatment plant is on a list of facilities targeted by environmental extremists as dangerous.

    Chemical manufacturers, says the author, aren’t opposed to safety. In fact, the industry places great emphasis on safety and has spent billions on plant security since 9/11.

  • Goyle holds campaign kick-off event in Old Town

    In front of a crowd of enthusiastic supporters at the Pumphouse in Old Town Wichita, Kansas House of Representatives member Raj Goyle held a kick-off event for his campaign for the United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas.

    In his brief remarks, Goyle said that after receiving his education out-of-state, he — unlike many young people — came back to Kansas. He told how outside Kansas, out state’s perception is not what we know it should be. The perception is that we’re not forward-thinking or dynamic. So he decided to run for the Kansas House of Representatives in 2006, from a district that had never elected a Democrat.

    He mentioned his work and leadership in passing legislation limiting the ability of Fred Phelps and members of his church from disruptively protesting funerals of soldiers.

    He also mentioned his advocacy in passing a bill that allowed Kansas to accept $70 million in federal stimulus money to extend unemployment benefits.

    He mentioned that he has never missed a vote in the Kansas House He said he has never taken a free personal meal from a lobbyist, nor has he accepted a taxpayer-funded trip.

    Goyle said that the American dream is in jeopardy, and is slowly slipping away, and that he will work every day to make sure that dream is “as available to you as it was for me.”

    He told young people that they should not have to choose between a well-paying, high-quality job and leaving Wichita.

    Analysis

    As Goyle has no serious challenger in the primary, and as he is unlikely to draw a challenger with name recognition and the ability to raise money, it’s a bit of a puzzle as to why he’s hitting the campaign trail so soon, some 11 months before the primary. The real action in the fourth district Congressional race in is the crowded Republican primary field.

    Goyle’s talk was short on substantive discussion of issues, which is probably the strategy I’d follow if I had no serious primary opposition and was speaking to an audience of enthusiastic supporters.

    I attended the event with my colleague John Todd, and as far as we could tell, we were the only non-Democrats in attendance. My presence caused a few tweets on Twitter, one remarking “Oh dear lord!” at my presence. Most of the Democrats I talked to were cordial — including the candidate himself — except for one quite disagreeable union activist who assumed I was there to collect dirt on Goyle, assumed I supported President Obama’s heckler, and painted me as a racist simply because I belong to the same party as Lynn Jenkins, she of the “great white hope” remark.

  • Pompeo announcement stresses health care, energy, national security

    Today Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo officially announced his candidacy for United States Congress for the fourth district of Kansas.

    In his introduction, Cessna CEO and Chairman Jack Pelton praised Pompeo as a businessman, as someone who has signed paychecks.

    In his address, Pompeo said our government has lost its way. Instead of personal responsibility, this government has advocated welfare. Instead of innovation and entrepreneurship, government has advocated bailouts.

    Saying that he has not run for public office, he thinks that is an “enormous plus in these times.” As a businessman, he has seen the effects of regulation and taxes on business.

    Pompeo stressed three issues:

    In health care, the issue is cost. We need to reduce the rate of growth in the cost of health care, and government has never been able to reduce costs or increase efficiency. He said that need to create competitive marketplaces, allow purchase of insurance across state lines, and pass tort reform. Government health care will destroy America’s leadership in innovation.

    The energy bill, while off the front pages for now, will come back. Cap-and-trade, he said, is the largest tax increase in history in the guise of environmental protection. The bill will reduce carbon emissions only slightly, but at huge costs. He said that with this bill, the gas and oil industry in America would become almost economically unviable, at the same time we’re trying to reduce the amount of energy we’re importing.

    On national security, Pompeo believes that President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Reid “simply don’t get it.” A strong defense creates a safe environment for Americans, and we don’t need to apologize for a strong American defense system.

    In closing, Pompeo said “the appropriate role of government is intensely limited.” He believes in sanctity of every human life.

    Analysis

    Today’s announcement was merely a formality, as Pompeo said he’s been campaigning for 17 weeks, and on April 7 of this year, I reported exclusively on the members of his campaign’s launch committee in the story Mike Pompeo congressional launch committee announced.

    Pompeo stresses his business experience, and that’s an appealing background to many conservatives. But government is not business, as the incentives are entirely different in the two fields. There are other businessmen in the running for this nomination, and I suspect that we’ll see government employee Jean Schodorf find some way to cast herself as someone who understands business.

    The Republican field is crowded already, and several more — both well-known and without name recognition — are considering joining the race. It’s a tempting challenge, as Congressional seats like this become available barely once per generation. If incumbents survive their first re-election, it’s pretty much a free ride from then on. In recent years, from 94% to 98% of U.S. House members were re-elected. Many don’t even draw a strong challenger.

    The selection of Cessna top executive Jack Pelton to make the introduction is a little curious. Pelton serves as chair of the Kansas Energy and Environmental Policy Advisory Group (KEEP). This organization, founded by former governor Kathleen Sebelius and run by the radical environmentalist group Center for Climate Strategies, is no friend to the energy industry, especially oil and gas, the market that Pompeo’s business serves.

  • Tiahrt endorsed by popular conservative figure

    Yesterday, former Secretary of Education and Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Bill Bennett endorsed Todd Tiahrt‘s campaign for the United States Senate in a Wichita appearance.

    Bennett said there is not an oversupply of good people in Washington, and when they’re found, we should elect them to higher office. Tiahrt is such a person, he said. He also praised Tiahrt’s character and integrity.

    In other remarks, Bennett said that these are consequential times. 2010 will be an important election year and will tell us a lot about the mood of the public. Last year’s election was of historical consequence, but now it is time to govern, he said.

    In response to a question about the concerns of callers to his conservative radio show, he said that people are concerned about the direction of the country. People have a sense that we drifting, and not only since the election of President Obama. He said that the major concern is not individual issues such as gay marriage, abortion, or guns, but the general status of the United States of America.

    As Bennett served as Education Secretary under Ronald Reagan, I asked a question about the Obama’s administration’s support of charter schools and differential or merit pay for teachers. Charter schools are good, and so is merit pay, he said. But if merit pay means what it has in a few experiments across the country — “give us the money first, and then we’ll figure out some system of merit” — he wouldn’t be in favor of it.

    He also said it “rings a little hollow” for the administration to talk about school choice when it is closing down a school choice program in Washington, D.C.

    Politically, this endorsement should give a boost to the Tiahrt campaign. Bennett is a respected statesman and very popular with conservatives.

    Wichita Eagle reporting of this event is at Bennett endorses Tiahrt for US Senate. Topeka Capital-Journal reporting is at Bennett backs Tiahrt’s Senate bid.

  • The good thing Senator Ted Kennedy did

    John Berlau reminds us of the legacy of Senator Edward M. “Ted” Kennedy:

    Most tributes to the “Liberal Lion” focus on his accomplishments at expanding government spending and regulation. And indeed, those were the bulk of his achievements.

    But for a brief, shining moment, in the mid to late 1970s, Kennedy viewed smaller government as the most compassionate answer in one area of economic life: transportation. Kennedy was the prime mover in Congress behind the airline and trucking deregulation bills that were signed by President Jimmy Carter. He saw the impact of regulation in these industries as protecting entrenched companies from competition, and decided that the liberal, compassionate thing to do was to deregulate to give consumers lower prices and more choices.

    The full article is at Ted Kennedy’s Deregulatory Legacy on Airlines and Trucking.

  • Waxman-Markey costly, ineffective

    The Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation that is working its way through Congress is ineffective in its stated goal, and will harm the American economy.

    The goal of this bill is to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, thereby reducing the threat of global warming. The amount of temperature reduction Waxman-Markey might produce is a matter of dispute, but most sources cite a decrease so small that it will be difficult to measure it. Its effect could easily be overwhelmed by something else over which we have no control.

    As bad as this is, the economic effects of this bill are certain, and they are devastating. The Science Applications International Corporation, at the request of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF), has produced an analysis of the effects of this legislation on the United States as a whole, and on each state. The reports may be read by clicking on Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act.

    At the national level, the economic effect of the Waxman-Markey bill would be to reduce employment by around two million jobs by 2030. Household income would go down, and energy prices would go up. From 2010 to 2030, the nation would lose from two to three trillion dollars of national income.

    For Kansas, the report notes that transportation manufacturing will show decreases in output of 8.0% to 8.4% by 2030. That’s a larger decline that what general manufacturing will experience. Transportation manufacturing, of course, includes the aircraft industry that Wichita depends on.

    This legislation is so bad that even global warming alarmists are necessarily fans of Waxman-Markey. The liberal magazine Mother Jones says this: “First, Waxman-Markey is a kludge of a bill. It’s possible that its cost-benefit is negative, and it’s almost certain that, by itself, its cost benefit is quite small even if it is positive. Second, W-M’s carbon caps by themselves will probably have only a tiny effect on rising temperatures. Third, global warming is a hopeless problem if we don’t get the rest of the world to address it too. If China and India and the rest of the developing world don’t play along, nothing the U.S. and Europe do by themselves will be enough to halt it.”