Monday, March 19th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Taxes
As long as gas prices are astronomically high, which will be for the foreseeable future, Obama will prance around the country lodging his cantankerous rhetoric against oil companies. He will continue to assert that oil companies are getting subsidies and green energy companies are getting “tax cuts.” Here are the relevant numbers from the WSJ that you need to bookmark. Save the information and use it the next time your liberal friends charge that oil companies are on the dole.
Here is the tax information for oil companies:
The federal Energy Information Administration reports that the industry paid some $35.7 billion in corporate income taxes in 2009, the latest year for which data are available. That alone is about 10% of non-defense discretionary spending—and it would cover a lot of Solyndras. That figure also doesn’t count excise taxes, state taxes and rents, royalties, fees and bonus payments. All told, the government rakes in $86 million from oil and gas every day—far more than from any other business. […]
Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest oil and gas company, says that in the five years prior to 2010 it paid about $59 billion in total U.S. taxes, while it earned . . . $40.5 billion domestically. Another way of putting it is that for every dollar of net U.S. profits between 2006 and 2010, the company incurred $1.45 in taxes. Exxon’s 2010 tax bill was three times larger than its domestic profits. The company can stay in business because it operates globally and earned a total net income after tax of $30.5 billion in 2010 on revenues of $370.1 billion.
Now let’s contrast that with green energy companies:
Monday, March 19th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Family Values, News
Remember the outrage when Obama’s Justice Department announced that it would no longer follow the law (Defense of Marriage Act) and defend states against lawsuits for upholding traditional marriage? Well, if you’re hearing crickets, you’re not missing anything. Boehner pretty much shunted it off to the courts and has no intention of dealing with it legislatively in the House. The Family Research Council is rightly outraged over this abdication of a basic tenet of conservatism. CQ has the story:
Boehner’s courtroom strategy was framed in response to many GOP lawmakers who privately urged him to avoid embroiling the House in a divisive social issue, particularly when any legislative action had no chance of advancing in the Senate, aides said.
The Speaker lamented the White House finding in a written statement at the time and said his decision to defend the law in the federal courts “will ensure the matter is addressed in a manner consistent with our Constitution.”
Since then, Boehner and other House leaders have largely avoided public comments on the topic. House debate has been all but absent, and Republicans who have sought to press the issue legislatively have run into roadblocks.
Last year, conservative lawmakers raised the possibility of a House vote on the merits of the constitutional issue, said a GOP aide familiar with the discussions. But party leaders said they preferred to pursue the legal option, the aide added.
Sunday, March 18th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Elections, News
Last week, Eric Cantor engaged in an unprecedented intervention in a member-on-member primary by endorsing a liberal freshman, Adam Kinzinger, over a conservative veteran, Don Manzullo. The latest evidence that Cantor’s endorsement actually hurt Manzullo is the fact that fellow Illinois Rep. Tim Johnson is endorsing Manzullo. Johnson asserted that he planned to remain neutral, but was prompted to intervene after witnessing Cantor’s egregious betrayal.
Friday, March 16th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Uncategorized
Today is James Madison’s 261st birthday. He is the father of our Constitution. It’s important to reflect on the importance of our constitutional republic as opposed to a pure democracy, which fosters elected despotism. Sadly, our Republic has drifted into an elected despotic democracy where a majority of voters can decide to infringe on the rights of the minority by electing corrupt politicians who supplant the Constitution. Madison warned in Federalist 46 about this:
An ELECTIVE DESPOTISM was not the government we fought for; but one which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.
Here at the Madison Project, we are committed to restoring the constitutional republic that Madison worked so hard to establish.
Friday, March 16th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Economy, Issues
Earlier in the week, we pointed out that Harry Reid wants to undermine a commonsense GOP jobs bill by attaching a reauthirization of the Import-Export Bank. This bank uses taxpayer funds to extend loans to boost domestic exports. The problem is that taxpayers are places on the hook for risky loans, ones from companies that the private sector obviously deems to tenuous to issue. It is nothing more than picking winners and losers in the free-market. Yet, Democrats want to extend the loan authority of the bank from $100 billion to $140 billion.
Eric Cantor already agreed to extending the bank for a year at $113 billion (yeah, I know, more pale pastels), yet that is not enough for some progressive Republicans. This, from the Hill:
Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) are co-sponsoring legislation that Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) is trying to attach to the House-passed JOBS Act.
The amendment extends the Ex-Im Bank through September 2015 and raises its loan limit to $140 billion from $100 billion. The bank’s charter runs out in May and it could hit its loan limit after March.
Friday, March 16th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Debt
Senators DeMint, Paul, Lee, Rubio, and Johnson penned an op-ed advocating for Cut, Cap, and Balance as our rallying cry.
Our course is unsustainable. The Congressional Budget Office has stated it can no longer make long-term budget estimates because our projected level of debt causes the computer models to break down somewhere in the 2040s. These trends aren’t those of a super power in decline, but a banana republic in the making – and a global economic anchor.
That’s why last year we co-sponsored a balanced budget amendment that would have, for the first time, not only forced Congress to get control of spending, but bound future Congresses to do the same.
We called on Congress to cut unnecessary, and unconstitutional, spending immediately, cap future spending in line with average historical revenues and send a balanced budget constitutional amendment to the states for ratification.
As Congress begins a new budget season, we stand by that call.
Friday, March 16th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Elections, News
Talk of a squandered GOP Senate majority is much exaggerated. According to a new Rasmussen poll, all GOP challengers to Claire McCaskill in Missouri are ahead. Madison endorsee, Cong. Todd Akin, is up 50-43%.
Friday, March 16th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Elections, Issues
In what’s become a biennial spectacle, supporters of unprincipled Republicans – who often vote with Democrats – are maligning conservatives as “purists” and accusing them of gambling away Republican control of the Senate. Today, Kimberley Strassel published a column in the WSJ, “Conservatives vs. a Senate Majority,” insinuating that Freedom Works and The Club for Growth are helping elect Democrats to the Senate. Specifically, she charges that conservatives opposing Lugar, Bruning, and Thompson will deny Mitch McConnell “the Senate majority leader’s office.”
There is one predominant point that is overlooked throughout Ms. Strassel’s column: it is the very insipid Republican candidates and senators that she supports who have helped the Democrats control the Senate – both in the minority and the majority. It is the very people like McConnell, Lugar, and Thompson who have supported big government, and will continue to support big government in the majority.
The column starts off on the wrong foot with this oleaginous opening line: “Two things stand between Mitch McConnell and the Senate majority leader’s office: Democrats, and the conservatives who might help elect Democrats.”
Wait a minute. Even if Republicans take back the Senate, who coronated McConnell to be majority leader? The very fact that she deems the election of McConnell as majority leader to be the superlative endgame tells you everything you need to know about her politics.
Thursday, March 15th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Issues, News
Obama has continuously insisted that oil production has increased under his stewardship. He has repeated this untruth in every speech across the country. Well, the U.S. Energy Information Administration has published the data of production from all fossil fuels on federal lands over the past decade. Take a look at the chart and you will see a precipitous drop corresponding with Obama’s tenure in office.
Thursday, March 15th, 2012 by Daniel Horowitz and is filed under Blog, Taxes
One of Obama’s favorite bromides is that he has never raised taxes on those earning less than $200,000. The problem is that he lies every time he repeats that statement. A government intervention in the form of regulations, mandates, and market-distorting subsidies is tantamount to a tax because it makes all consumers pay more for vital products and services. In that sense, it is an extremely regressive tax that disproportionately hurts lower and middle-income earners who spend a large share of their income on food and energy.
Earlier in the week, the Heritage Foundation published a comprehensive report about the costs of Obama’s regulations in just three years. They found that his 106 new federal regulations cost the economy $46 billion. That is “almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years.”
Here are some other key points from this magnanimous report: