Democrats Against Sustainable Development and Smart Growth

/in , , , , /by

If you go to your city, county, school board or state official website you will see words like “sustainable development” and “smart growth”. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) uses these words on its website. The FDEP website states, “The goal of the Sustainable Initiatives programs is to promote sustainability in Florida businesses, schools and homes. Sustainability is meeting the needs of the present population without compromising the ability of future populations to meet its needs.”

Another example is the University of Florida sustainability website. The about page reads, “Simply defined, sustainability is meeting contemporary needs without compromising the ability of future generations to satisfy their needs. More comprehensively, it means looking at the issues and problems facing our world with a new perspective – one that focuses on three interdependent areas of concern: ecological preservation, economic viability, and social justice.” Note the words “social justice”.

Florida even has a Sustainability Institute, whose mission is to address, “Direct threats, such as sea level rise and extreme weather events, and indirect risks linked to our region’s status as a global destination and trade center, place Florida on the front lines of the fight against global warming. ”

So why are Democrats, especially progressive ones from California, against sustainable development and smart growth? Answer: It is all about taking away property rights.

The leader of these progressive Democrats is Rosa Koire, ASA, who is a forensic commercial real estate appraiser specializing in eminent domain valuation.  Her twenty-eight year career as an expert witness on land use has culminated in exposing the impacts of Sustainable Development on private property rights and individual liberty.

Koire is on the Board of Directors and Executive Director of The Post Sustainability Institute. The Post Sustainability Institute was established to study the impacts that “Sustainable Development” and “Communitarianism” have on liberty.  The intent is to track the progression of the sustainability movement and to forecast the most likely outcomes if it proceeds unchecked.

Koire became involved in 2005 when she was elected to a citizens’ oversight committee in Santa Rosa, Northern California, to review a proposed 1,300 acre redevelopment project in which 10,000 people live and work. Her research into the documents justifying the plans led her, with her partner Kay Tokerud, to challenge the fraudulent basis for the huge Gateways Redevelopment Project. The City, in an attempt to block Koire from exposing the project, removed the neighborhood in which Koire and Tokerud’s properties were located from the redevelopment area.

Koire and Tokerud fought on, however, not wanting to abandon the thousands of business and property owners still in the area. They formed a business and property owners association and a non-profit organization (Concerned Citizens of Santa Rosa Against Redevelopment Law Abuse) and were able to raise nearly $500,000 in donations and pro bono legal work to sue the City of Santa Rosa to stop the project. The court case, Tokerud v. City of Santa Rosa, lost in Superior Court but the court ruled that they could continue, and they appealed to the San Francisco First District Court of Appeals where they lost again in 2009. The three years of litigation fighting eminent domain and the redevelopment project succeeded in delaying the project while the economy collapsed–the City has failed to implement its plans, but still has the power of eminent domain over the 1,100 acre area until 2018.

Koire is the author of the book “Behind The Green Mask“. In the book Koire states:

No matter where you live, I’ll bet that there have been hundreds of condos built or planned in the center of your town recently. Over the last ten years there has been a “planning revolution: across the US. It was the implementation of Growing Smart.

Your commercial, industrial and multi-residential land was rezones to “mixed use”. Nearly everything that got approvals for development was designed the same way: ground floor retail with two or three stories of residential above. Mixed use.

Very hard to finance for construction, and very hard to manage since it has to have a high density of people in order to justify the retail. A lot of it empty and most of the ground floor retail is empty too. High Bankruptcy rate. Two areas like this in Jacksonville Florida – off Gate and Southside where Three Forks Restaurant is? And at Town Center mall. [My emphasis]

Florida has been run by Republicans for over a decade. It was during that decade that “sustainable development” became the cause of the party and those elected at every level. All in the name of the taking of property to insure social justice for future generations.

What impact does inflation have on the minimum wage?

/in , , , /by

The Dollar Times has posted on its website an inflation calculator.  The calculator, “[W]ill tell you the relative buying power of a dollar in the United States between any two years from 1914-2013. It will also calculate the rate of inflation during the time period you choose.”

The calculator determines the value of a dollar using the Consumer Price Index from December of the previous year. All calculations are approximate.

The Dollar Times offers these facts: In 2007, the inflation rate was 4.08%. This was higher than any year since 1990. In 2008, the inflation rate was 0.09%, the lowest rate since 1954.

Using the calculator Beth Colvin from Sarasota Patriots provided WDW with these facts:

Minimum wage in 1955 was $0.75 which was equivalent to $4.39 today. Minimum wage in 2012 was $7.25 which was equivalent to $4.97 in 1955. Minimum wage in 2013 will be $9.00.

$1.00 in 1955 had the same buying power as $8.60 in 2013.

Therefore $9.00 today represents buying power of $77.40 in 1950.

So go to the Inflation Calculator and have some fun seeing how the value of your dollar and buying power has changed over time.

Time for Florida to Pull the Plug on Electric Vehicles?

/in , , , /by

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report in 2012 that has received scant media attention. The report titled “Effects of Federal Tax Credits for the Purchase of Electric Vehicles” takes a critical look at government subsidies for electric vehicles (EV).

Proponents argued for tax subsidies on the promise that EVs would reduce gasoline use and emissions.

The CBO report states, “[T]he [tax] credits will result in little or no reduction in the total gasoline use and greenhouse gas emissions of the nation’s vehicle fleet over the next several years.”

The CBO notes, “At current vehicle and energy prices, the lifetime costs to consumers of an electric vehicle are generally higher than those of a conventional vehicle or traditional hybrid vehicle of similar size and performance, even with the tax credits, which can be as much as $7,500 per vehicle. That conclusion takes into account both the higher purchase price of an electric vehicle and the lower fuel costs over the vehicle’s life.”

The following chart provides an overview of the CBO findings:

According to the US Department of Energy – Alternative Fuels Data Center, Florida has 351 charging stations. These EV charging stations are concentrated in the cities of Orlando, Tampa and Miami/Dade. Nearly all of the state charging stations are part of the California based ChargePoint Network. According to its website, “ChargePoint customers include large corporations such as Google and SAP; utilities such as Orlando Utilities Commission…” NovaCharge, LLC is the distributor of charging stations in the Southeast United States and is headquartered in Tampa, Florida. According to the NovaCharge website it is, “[D]edicated to enabling a better environment for future generations by supporting zero-emissions transportation infrastructure.”

Florida is home to several early adopters of EVs. Among them is the Fahs family – Fran and Ron.  Fran is also owner of  Tallahassee based Green Energy Marketing and Consulting, LLC. Fran created the Electric Vehicle Initiative (EVI) website and has become an activist for expanding the use of EVs in Florida and across America.  The EVI website states, “For years we have wanted to do something substantial to help the environment. Empowering people to take control of their transportation costs while taking a big chunk out of global warming is our desired contribution.”

In a personal email Fran Fahs stated to WDW, “With the recent attack on the Algerian oil field, the mega-storms and mega fires of the past years, I think that many more people understand that the time has definitely come to reduce our dependency on oil. It is evident from the environmental degradation that we see in our world that these environmental costs that will be passed on to the taxpayers, represents a subsidy to oil producers, since we, and not they, are paying for these high environmental costs of mining that oil from the ground.”

The common thread in all of these EV initiatives is to “help the environment” and “reduce transportation costs”. The CBO report appears to fly in the face of both of these goals. Continued subsidizing of EVs has no measurable effects other than using taxpayer money to fund credits for those who would have bought their EV anyway. Taxpayers are also subsidizing the costs of the charging stations.

It is commendable to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. That has been the stated goal of the Department of Energy since its inception. That goal has been elusive. However, another report by the US National Intelligence Council projects energy independence for America as achievable within 20 years. The path to energy independence is due to two new technologies – fracking and horizontal drilling.

WDW has asked for comments on the CBO report from Florida proponents. When they are received this column will be updated.

Governor Scott comes under fire for his $2,500 teacher pay giveaway

/in , , , , , /by

Governor Rick Scott announced that Florida will have a budget surplus in 2013-2014 of $437 million. That is good news. Republicans got to this point of a surplus after years of budget deficits by cutting the size of government programs. The Republican party stands for less government, lower taxes and less spending.

So what does Scott want to do with that money?

He wants to give teachers an across the board pay increase of $2,500, which will spend the entire surplus and more. This idea is drawing boos from teachers unions. It is also drawing fire from other public service employees such as fire fighters, EMS personnel and law enforcement officers. Why teachers and not them? Some are even saying that Scott is buying votes, much like President Obama and members of Congress who increase benefits for government employees and those who take for a living via welfare programs.

Here is something that Scott may not have considered: Why not give the money back to the taxpayers?

It is the taxpayer who carries the burden of the salaries and benefits of public employees. Any salary increase to any public employee is a further long term burden on the Florida Retirement System. The Tampa Bay Times reports, “In a major victory for the state, the Florida Supreme Court ruled 4-3 against state workers and allowed the state to retain the 3 percent levy on worker salaries to offset the state’s investment into the Florida Retirement System.”  Download Retirement ruling.

Union leaders do not like it when their members have to contribute to their own retirement programs like public sector employees do. So this move by Scott appears to be pandering to one group of union employees. Scott may be giving up hard fought ground based upon the recent Florida Supreme Court decision.

Who holds the bag for any government employee pay increase? Answer: Florida’s taxpayers.

We will see what the Florida legislature does with the budget surplus. Any bets that they will find a way to spend it? Are Republicans morphing into Progressives? What the legislature does with this surplus will be a key indicator of where they stand on taxes and spending.

US Government: Fracking is the Future

/in , , , /by

The US National Intelligence Council has released its latest report Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds.

The report states:

“Experts are virtually certain that demand for energy will rise dramatically—about 50 percent—over the next 15-20 years largely in response to rapid economic growth in the developing world. The US Energy Information Agency anticipates steadily rising global production through 2035, driven primarily by a combination of OPEC production increases and larger unconventional sources. The main or references scenario of the International Energy Agency also posits growing global production of key fossil fuels through 2030 (about 1 percent annually for oil). Much of this increased production—and recent optimism—derives from unconventional oil and gas being developed in North America. The scale-up of two technologies, horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, is driving this new energy boom. Producers have long known shale “source rock”—rock from which oil and natural gas slowly migrated into traditional reservoirs over millions of years. Lacking the means economically to unlock the massive amounts of hydrocarbon in the source rock, producers devoted their attention to the conventional reservoirs.” [My emphasis]

“Once the industry discovered how to combine hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, the vast gas resources trapped in shale deposits became accessible. The economic and even political implications of this technological revolution, which won’t be completely understood for some time, are already significant,” stated the report.

“In a tectonic shift, energy independence is not unrealisticfor the US in as short a period as 10-20 years. Increased oil production and the shale gas revolution could yield such independence. US production of shale gas has exploded with a nearly 50 percent annual increase between 2007 and 2011, and natural gas prices in the US have collapsed.”

US has sufficient natural gas to meet domestic needs for decades to come, and potentially substantial global exports.

Service companies are developing new “super fracking” technologies that could dramatically increase recovery rates still further.

The report concludes, “The prospect of significantly lower energy prices will have significant positive ripple effect for the US economy, encouraging companies to taking advantage of lower energy prices to locate or relocate to the US. Preliminary analysis of the impact on the US economy suggests that these developments could deliver a 1.7-2.2 percent increase in GDP and 2.4-3.0 million additional jobs by 2030.“

Read the entire report:

Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds by

The Integrity of the Florida Public Service Commission in the “Toilet”?

/in , , , /by

Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) website states, “The Florida Public Service Commission is committed to making sure that Florida’s consumers receive some of their most essential services — electric, natural gas, telephone, water, and wastewater — in a safe, reasonable, and reliable manner. In doing so, the PSC exercises regulatory authority over utilities in one or more of three key areas: rate base/economic regulation; competitive market oversight; and monitoring of safety, reliability, and service.”

The FPSC was considering a rate increase for Florida Power and Light (FPL) late last year. However, the process according to those attending the public hearings on the rate increase was usurped by FPL and commission staff at the expense of Florida citizens. Larry Nelson, a citizen present during the 2012 hearings in Sarasota and Miami, outlined in a letter how FPL was given preferential treatment by the Commission and staff.

Nelson wrote, “My first stop on my adventure was the public service hearing held in Sarasota on May 31, 2012. Here I first saw the most shocking thing about the public hearing process. In the lobby of the hearing site (Sarasota City Hall) were numerous FPL customer service representatives wearing FPL shirts who are greeting members of the public arriving to speak to the rate increase proposal. And FPL seems to have their own dedicated room. Which made no sense at all. It’s like a court hearing but one of the parties to the case gets to have their own room in the courthouse and a staff to lobby everyone, judges, jurors and the public as they walk by as to why their side is right. FPL also gets to have a table handing out literature. Nobody else gets to have a room or a table or representatives right outside the hearing room. There is no Audubon Society, no Environmental Defense Fund, no Florida Public Interest Research Group in the lobby lobbying (I guess that is where the term comes from!) against the rate increase or against the proposals or actions of FPL.”

The result of the rate increase hearings was FPSC issuing an Order on January 14th, 2013 granting Florida Power and Light FPL the ability to self-regulate over the next 4-years and to increase rates without citizen representation by the Office of Public Counsel. Thomas Saporito, from Saprodani Associates, believes that the process by which the FPSC came to issue this order was at best flawed and at worse illegal violating  multiple Florida statutes.

Saporito states, “The recent decision by the Florida Public Service Commission has placed public trust and confidence and the integrity of the agency in the “toilet”. No longer can the citizens of Florida have any measure of trust or confidence in the agency to be an advocate for the Public Interest regarding electric rates established for the Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). ”

According to Saporito, “The settlement is “illegal” as a matter of law because the Commission does not have requisite jurisdiction and authority to consider the settlement for several reasons:

(1) the Office of Public Counsel (OPC) opposed the settlement and OPC represents all FPL ratepayers – and is a vital and required signatory to any FPL settlement;

(2) the settlement violates the “due-process” rights of citizens who would otherwise intervene where FPL seeks recovery for power plants which have not yet been built or are not yet operational;

(3) the Commission placed the settlement hearing on a rush basis and denied intervenors from fully participating in the discovery process; and

(4) the settlement allows FPL to create a “slush-fund” and access depreciation and dismantlement funds without proper oversight for the sole purpose of raising FPL’s return on equity (profits for its shareholders).”

Thomas Saporito filed a motion for reconsideration on January 14th, 2013 asking the Commission to reconsider its decision.

According to Saporito: “I am gravely concerned about the Commission’s approval of the revised settlement with FPL where the citizens had no representation by the Office of Public Counsel. I have raised serious mis-conduct issues about the entire Commission with Steven J. Stolting, Inspector General – Office of Inspector General and I have asked his office to conduct an investigation.”

Depending on the Commission’s decision on his motion to reconsider – Saporito, “Fully intends to challenge the Commission’s Order – in filing an appeal with the Florida Supreme Court – and to file with agencies of the federal government – and perhaps a civil legal action.”

Gov. Scott to Meet with HHS Secretary Sebelius on Medicaid

/in , , , /by

The Villages TEA Party in an email to its members states:

“FACTS: On Monday, January 7th, Governor Rick Scott will meet with HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius to discuss expanding Medicaid in the State of Florida. Economists predicted in November 2012 that the Medicaid expansion would cost $9 Billion, however the Florida Agency for Health Care Administration estimates the cost to be near $25 Billion. Those who know the Obama Care law have always said that implementing it will break the states eventually, and increasing Medicaid is a big component in this destruction. Many are already seeing the numbers inflating.”

The costs of the Medicaid expansion will impact the Florida Medicaid program.

According to StateHealthFacts.org Florida in 2010 spent over $17.3 billion on Medicaid. Medicaid costs have gone up annually. From 1990-2001 Medicaid costs in Florida went up 11.8%. Between 2001-2010 Medicaid costs increase in Florida more than doubled to 24.5%, outpacing a national average cost increase during the same period of 19.8%.

According to the Tampa Bay Times and Miami Herald, “The federal government agreed to fund 100 percent of the cost for states to expand Medicaid for three budget years. The federal government would cover 95 percent of the costs in 2017, 94 percent of the costs in 2018, 93 percent of the costs in 2019 and 90 percent of the costs in 2020 and beyond.”

The expansion is voluntary, but the federal government said it would penalize any state (by withholding Medicaid funds) that failed to comply. That penalty was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 28, 2012. The court’s ruling allows states like Florida to decline expansion without losing any current funding.

UPDATE:

Governor Scott release the following statement today:

WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Governor Rick Scott met with U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to discuss how the state can improve cost, quality and access in healthcare for Florida families. Governor Scott said his meeting with Sec. Sebelius focused on the projected $26 billion state cost of doubling people in Florida’s Medicaid program under the president’s new healthcare law, and requesting HHS approval for the state’s long-term care and Statewide Medicaid Managed Care plans that would make healthcare more affordable.

Governor Scott said, “We had a great conversation with Sec. Sebelius today about how we can improve cost, quality and access in healthcare for Florida families. We need to know more about how the healthcare choices facing our state would affect families – many who are still struggling to get a job and make ends meet.

“I believe that Medicaid is an important healthcare safety net. Florida’s Medicaid program today provides health care to over 3.3 million Floridians and is approximately 30 percent of our state budget. The cost of Medicaid has been growing at three-and-one-half times the growth rate of the state’s general revenue, which crowds out our ability to invest in K-12 education, higher education and other priorities.

“Growing government is never free. Under the new healthcare law, Florida would nearly double the people in our Medicaid program over 10 years. AHCA estimates that this would result in a total cost to taxpayers of more than $63 billion over 10 years, including $26 billion in costs to Florida taxpayers. We also know that adding people to Medicaid will affect our state for generations to come because government growth is almost never reversed. The current fiscal cliff debate here in Washington is proof of that.

“I also asked Sec. Sebelius to approve our state’s Statewide Medicaid Managed Care and long term care proposals, which are currently awaiting HHS approval. We also discussed ideas for lowering health care costs, including tax incentives for individuals to buy insurance, price incentives for healthy behaviors, and flexibility to buy personalized coverage. Our ultimate goal is to lower the cost of healthcare in Florida so all families can access the level of care they desire.”

RUBIO: THE REAL FISCAL CLIFF IS OUR UNSUSTAINABLE LEVEL OF DEBT

/in , , , , /by

Excerpts from Senator Marco Rubio on The Sean Hannity Show January 2, 2013

RUBIO: This was not a fiscal cliff. The real fiscal cliff is the fact that the middle class is not growing, the economy is not growing and our country continues to owe more money than our economy produces every single year. I mean our debt’s $16 trillion, our economy does – produces less than that every single year. So think about it, our debt is now larger than our economy. And the fundamental issue before us is how can we get the middle class growing again, how can we get the economy growing again, and how can we bring the debt under control which is one of the reasons why the economy and jobs aren’t growing. And this bill [has] nothing to do with that. Now look, I appreciate the hard work that went into it and that the folks that worked on it were trying to make the best of a tough situation where taxes were going to go up automatically anyway but I just continue to get frustrated that we’re always being given false choices to vote on here. And- and I just, you know I – we’re going to be right back at this in two months when the debt limit issue comes up.

HANNITY: Well, you know I used the analogy earlier today: this is the equivalent of putting a Band-Aid on a gun wound and the Band-Aid was infected. You know, it just seems that bad to me. Is there any cutting in this at all, because if you read the CBO numbers, and I know some conservatives don’t agree with them, that this fiscal cliff deal is going to add $4 trillion to the deficit compared to current law? Now I know they include tax cuts as lowering income to the government, but is that about right?

RUBIO: Well it is, and obviously, and now we get real technical on it, it depends on which baseline you’re using to compare it from. Were you assuming the tax cuts were going to go away? Were you assuming they were going to stay in place? Are you assuming the sequester is going to go in in two months? So there’s a lot of assumptions still … Here’s a better way to understand it, you know, our economy today is headed toward an unsustainable level of debt, I mean at 22 – 23 trillion before the end of the next four years. And what’s driving that – the single greatest thing that’s driving that, it’s not foreign aid and discretionary spending, it’s the entitlement programs, in particular medicare, which is going bankrupt and needs to be saved. And the longer we wait to deal with that the harder it’s going to be to fix this and more disruptive it’s going to be to fix it.

Florida Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart, Bill Young, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ander Crenshaw, Vern Buchanan cave

/in , , , /by

History will mark this day as the death of the Republican Party as they caved on their core principles. The Republican ideals of smaller government, lower taxes and less spending are now officially history.

Future generations will look back on this day as the end of the Party of Lincoln and the beginning of the end of the republic.

Republicans, Democrats and President Obama are all now on the same page. There is less than one degree of separation between the parties. Tax, spend and borrow are the new mantras. All of the political posturing during the holidays was a joke on the American taxpayers, especially those making over $250,000.

Big government is the “new-normal” inside the beltway.

The Washington Times reports that the “fiscal cliff” deal that was designed to save money actually includes $330.3 billion in new spending over the next decade, according to the official estimate the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday afternoon.

CBO said the bill contains about $25.1 billion in new cuts, but those are swamped by the new spending on extended unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and other new refundable tax credits that President Obama fought for.

Of those cuts, only $2 billion are scheduled to take effect in 2013.  All told, the bill deepens the deficit by nearly $4 trillion over the next decade, when the new tax cuts and spending are combined.

According to the Heritage Foundation, “In addition to tax increases on Americans making more than $250,000 a year, the bipartisan deal will actually raise taxes on the vast majority of American workers. How? The payroll tax ‘holiday’ has ended. The Wall Street Journal calculates that the ‘typical U.S. family earning $50,000 a year’ will lose ‘an annual income boost of $1,000‘.”

Republicans and Democrats have perfected the art of compromise, which is the art of losing our unalienable rights slowly. Nothing has changed except the date certain of the financial collapse of the United States. As Senator Marco Rubio stated, “This deal just postpones the inevitable.”

As of January 2, 2012, the United States officially has what is in effect a one party system. Republicans and Democrats alike are fundamentally progressives with the same core principle – government is the solution, not the problem. The big loser is the American dream.

Pax Americana is dead.

UPDATE:

Representative Buchanan sent the below statement via email to constituents about his vote:

 I wanted to let you know about the bipartisan vote in Congress last night to keep the country from falling off the fiscal cliff.  I was one of 85 Republicans to support this compromise legislation, which now goes to the President for his signature.

This legislation reduced taxes for 99 percent of American taxpayers and ensures that seniors on Medicare can continue to see the doctor of their choice.  While the legislation is not perfect (it does nothing to address out-of-control spending), we could not allow gridlock to push the nation off the fiscal cliff and risk an economic meltdown.

It is my expectation that the spending issue will be addressed by Congress in the next 60 days.

Please let me know what you think of last night’s passage of the bipartisan “American Taxpayer Relief Act”.

Vern

Rubio Votes Against Fiscal Cliff Deal

/in , , /by

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) today issued the following statement after voting against the so-called deal to avert the fiscal cliff by imposing job-killing taxes and failing to solve America’s long term debt problem:

“I appreciate all the hard word that went into avoiding the so-called ‘fiscal cliff’. I especially commend Senator McConnell’s efforts to make the best out of a bad situation. Nevertheless, I cannot support the arrangement they have arrived at. Rapid economic growth and spending reforms are the only way out of the real fiscal cliff our nation is facing. But rapid economic growth and job creation will be made more difficult under the deal reached here in Washington.

“Thousands of small businesses, not just the wealthy, will now be forced to decide how they’ll pay this new tax and, chances are, they’ll do it by firing employees, cutting back their hours and benefits, or postponing the new hire they were looking to make. And to make matters worse, it does nothing to bring our dangerous debt under control.

“Of course, many Americans will be relieved in the short term that their taxes won’t go up. However in the long run, they will be hurt when employers pass on to them one of the largest tax hikes in decades. Furthermore, this deal just postpones the inevitable, the need to solve our growing debt crisis and help the 23 million Americans who can’t find the work they need.”

Time to Privatize Florida’s Libraries

/in , , /by

In September 2004 a report was published titled “Taxpayer Return on Investment in Florida Public Libraries: Summary Report“. The survey based report done by the University of Pennsylvania states, “In 2003-4, an estimated 11.8 million people visited Florida public libraries in person.  Adult Florida residents form the majority of visitors, but tourists form a surprising 29 percent of in-person visitors to the libraries, although they account for only 5 percent of visits as they tend to visit just once. Over half of Florida’s adult resident population and over a third of all Florida children make in-person visits to Florida’s public libraries.  Approximately 13 percent of adult Florida residents and an unknown number of Florida children connect via the Internet to the public library.”

The report justifies taxpayer financed public libraries.

Recent experiences with privatized libraries may make the findings of this report null and void. Scott Reeder from Watchdog.org writes, “Public libraries are near sacred institutions in our communities but in a time of escalating municipal debt they have become increasingly vulnerable as local governments look for places to cut. A common refrain among municipal officials is: How can the same of service be offered for less money?”

“A smattering of cities across the nation has turned to private firms as a solution. The results are intriguing,” states Reeder.

Reeder found, “Santa Clarita, Calif., saw its annual cost to operate a public library drop from $6.2 million per year to $4.2 million when they hired a private firm rather than have public employees operate the city’s three libraries, said Darren Hernandez, the city’s deputy city manager. Before a private firm took over day-to-day operations, Santa Clarita’s three libraries were operated by the Los Angeles County Library system.”

Reeder reports that during the first two years of the public/private partnership, significant improvements in service were experienced:

  • The materials budget – for books, magazines and other items – has expanded almost 10-fold to $2 million annually.
  • Library operating hours have more than doubled.
  • Circulation of library materials has increased 15 percent.
  • Participation in library-sponsored events such as children’s reading programs has increased.

This all occurred because the City of Santa Clarita did not have to pay the pensions of librarians. Reeder reports, “By hiring a private firm, the city was able to avoid paying public pensions to library workers, [Santa Clarita City Manager] Hernandez said. He added that California public employees have some of the most generous pensions in the nation.”

Given the growing pressure on the Florida legislature to find savings, perhaps it is time to look at the Santa Clarita experience. Taxpayer funded libraries may be found at the city, county, school board and state college/university levels throughout Florida.

A new look at privatization may be in order.

Indian River Pulls out of Florida Seven/50 Project

/in , , , /by

Following a lengthy session of public comment and discussion, the Indian River County Commission in Vero Beach, FL voted 4-1 in favor of removing the county from the Seven/50 project which is a seven county, fifty year sustainability initiative. Commissioners Solari, Davis, Flescher and Zorc voted to remove the county from the project.

The vote was a direct result of the work of the Indian River TEA Party and concerned citizens educating friends, family members and neighbors on the dangers of regionalization and sustainability initiatives especially in regard to the infringement on the property rights of individuals.

According to Danita Killcullen, “The task force meeting I attended was frightening, with Kristin Jacobs as Chair with the Republican Mayor of Lauderdale-By-The-Sea, who I’ve known for several years, seated at her right.  At the end of the meeting I asked Mayor Rosanne Minnet if she agrees with all we saw and heard today and her answer was, ‘Oh, yes… It’s happening right now!’ They are very far ahead of us and we have much ground to make-up.”

The Indian River TEA Party in an email states, “It is our hope that this one vote will be a shot heard nationwide as similar initiatives are either in place or are planned for communities in every state. Much work lies ahead in balancing the need to maintain our natural resources while upholding the individual liberties we hold dear. To that end, please consider becoming a more active part of your local government as we believe our elected officials truly desire increased public involvement. ”

“The vote today affects the unincorporated areas of Indian River County only and not the City of Vero Beach, Sebastian or other townships. These communities will remain a part of the Seven/50 project unless residents speak out and ask their leaders to follow the lead of Indian River County,” notes the Indian River TEA Party board of directors.

To learn more about the history and intent of “sustainable development” click here.

Florida braces for major job losses in 2013

/in , , , /by

According to the Heritage Foundation, “The Budget Control Act’s $1.2 trillion automatic sequestration cuts, out of $46.3 trillion in total spending, would impose draconian cuts on defense (on top of an estimated $407 billion in cuts from its spending caps). This would slash the defense budget and jeopardize the U.S. military’s ability to defend the nation. Entitlement spending—the biggest part of the budget— would scarcely be touched by comparison.”

Florida has twenty-one military installations, and is home to U.S. Central Command at MacDill AFB in Tampa.

Florida stands to lose 79,459 jobs and $4.1 billion in labor income by the end of fiscal 2013 if $1.2 trillion in federal defense cuts take place in January as planned.  A report conducted by George Mason University economist Stephen Fuller reports Florida would suffer the sixth highest job losses of all the states.

The report measures the impact of both defense and nondefense employment reductions at federal agencies and their contractors, as well as at businesses that count them as customers.

A little more than half of Florida’s lost jobs in the next fiscal year — 41,905 — would result from Department of Defense cuts, and the rest would stem from reductions at civilian agencies. During that period, Florida would also see gross state product losses of $8 billion.

sequestercuts

The George Mason University report concludes – The magnitude of economic impacts resulting from the Budget Control Act of 2011 over the combined FY 2012-FY 2013 period have been shown to be large and their impact on the U.S. economy to be significant:

• Combined DOD and non-DOD agency spending reductions totaling $115.7 billion in FY 2013 would reduce the 2013 U.S. GDP by $215.0 billion.

• These spending reductions would result in the loss of 746,222 direct jobs including cutbacks in the federal workforce totaling 277,263 and decreases in the federal contractor workforce totaling 468,959 jobs, thus affecting all sectors of the national economy.

• The loss of these 746,222 direct jobs and 432,978 jobs of suppliers and vendors (indirect jobs) dependent on the prime contractors would reduce total labor income in the U.S. by $109.4 billion.

• The loss of this labor income and the resultant impacts of reduced consumer spending in the economy would generate an additional loss of 958,508 jobs dependent on the spending and re-spending of payroll dollars associated with the direct and indirect jobs lost as a result of BCA.

• This loss of $215.0 billion in GDP and 2.14 million jobs in 2013 would erase two-thirds of the GDP gains projected for the year and raise the national unemployment rate by 1.5 percentage points by the end of 2013.

• These economic impacts would affect every state with their respective vulnerabilities to projected DOD and non-DOD spending reductions being determined by their agency mix and relative magnitudes of federal payroll and procurement. Based on current patterns of federal spending by state, ten states account for more than half of total federal payroll and procurement outlays. This significant concentration of federal spending represents a major threat to these states’ economies in 2013. While other states may appear less vulnerable to federal spending reductions, these may also suffer significant impacts dues to their smaller sizes or more specialized economic structures.

To read more click here.

Climate Depot: Extreme Weather Report 2012

/in , , /by

Climate Depot and the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow presented a comprehensive report at the UN climate conference titled, “Extreme Weather Report 2012“. The following are excerpts from the report:

The man-made global warming movement has officially shifted from runaway global warming fears over to extreme weather fears. This strategic shift has been in the works for years as global average temperatures have stalled by up to 16 years. First there was a transition from “global warming” to “climate change” and now to “global climate disruption.” Some have suggested “global weirding” others have suggested a “new normal.”

At the opening of the 18 annual United Nations climate summit being held in Doha, Qatar, UN climate chief Christiana Figueres, urged governments around the world to “do something about” extreme weather. “We have had severe climate and weather events all over the world and everyone is beginning to understand that is exactly the future we are going to be looking about if they don’t do something about it,” Figueres explained at the opening of the annual UN climate summit.

In June of this year, Democrat Rep. Henry Waxman (Ca) blamed CO2 for wildfires in Colorado and floods in Florida. “It’s time to stop denying science. Extreme events like the wildfires in Colorado and the floods in Florida are going to get worse unless Republican-controlled Congress changes course soon,” Waxman explained.

Global warming proponents claimed that 2012 was a ‘new normal’ in climate with “unprecedented” weather events. Former Vice President Al Gore summed up this view when he wrote: “Every night on the news now, practically, is like a nature hike through the book of Revelations.

Sen Boxer (D-Calif), the chair of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee declared: “Hurricane Sandy has shown us all what the scientists sitting right in this room said the day I got the gavel, & they told us exactly what would happen and it’s all happening.”

Scientific studies & data counter these claims.

The latest peer-reviewed studies, data and analysis undermine the case that the weather is more “extreme” or “unprecedented.” On every key measure, claims of extreme weather in our current climate fail to hold up to scrutiny.

The report concludes, “Extreme weather events are ever present, and there is no evidence of systematic increases.”

Read the full study by clicking here.

The Income Tax: Root of All Evil

/in , , /by

Politicians and pundits alike are discussing the “fiscal cliff”. What has become a focus of the discussion by both political parties and the President are income taxes. Specifically, raising income taxes on the rich. None are addressing the root cause of the crisis the United States faces today, which is the income tax itself. The title of this column is from a book written by Frank Chodorov in 1954.

Chodorov wrote, “Income and inheritance taxes imply the denial of private property, and in that are different in principle from all other taxes.”

“The government says to the citizen: Your earnings are not exclusively your own; we have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours; we will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, not your right; but whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide,” states Chodorov.

In the forward to Chodorov’s book J. Bracken Lee, the ninth Governor of Utah, wrote, “[A] weak government is the corollary of a strong people.”

Lee wrote, “The Sixteenth Amendment [which created the income tax] changed all that. In the first place, by enabling the federal government to put its hands into the pockets and pay envelopes of the people, it drew their allegiance away from their local governments. It made them citizens of the United States rather than of their respective states.”

“Theft loyalty followed theft money, which was now taken from them not by their local representatives, over whom they had some control, but by the representatives of the other forty-seven states. They became subject to the will of the central government, and their state of subjection was emphasized by every increase in the income-tax levies,” warned former Governor Lee in 1954.

Chodorov puts into historical perspective the how and why we have arrived at this point and today face yet another fiscal cliff. The United States faced this same crisis in 1873.

Chodorov stated, “But hungry people are impatient. They cannot wait for deflation to wipe out the debris of their own orgy. A much quicker cure is called for, and the medicine that promises a quick cure is money. During the [Civil] war, it was reasoned, the government printed greenbacks and there was prosperity; why not print more greenbacks and force prosperity to come back? And so, during the depression of 1873–76, and for twenty years after, there was a loud clamor for greenbacks, plus silver money to supplement the scarce gold. This was the principal recipe of the social doctors of the times, a loud-mouthed lot who acquired the generic name of Populists.” [Emphasis mine]

Chodorov noted that during the depression of 1873, “These [Populist] do- gooders were most vocal in the new West, where the ‘hard times’ hit hardest and held on for the longest time. The story of this area is the story of the railroads. In the light of later experience, we can describe the railroad expansion of the 1880’s as a make-work program, fostered by government subsidies and bounties.” Sounds eerily familiar to today’s calls to fund infrastructure improvements by the President and members of Congress.

Chodorov wrote, “[T]he income tax appealed to them [the Populists] as a means of wreaking their vengeance on those they hated—that is, those who had more than they had.”

Additionally, “Income taxation appeals to the governing class because in its everlasting urgency for power it needs money.” By 1891, the Populists, who had by that time coagulated into the People’s Party (1892-1908), included an income-tax plank in their platform. The Democratic Party later appropriated it. A typical remark in the debate on income taxation of 1894 is the following from a speech by the Populist Senator William. A. Peffer from Kansas:

“The only object we have in view in presenting this amendment [graduated income tax] is to rake in where there is something to rake in not to throw out the dragnet where there is nothing to catch. The West and the South have made you people rich.”

Chodorov notes, “The Populists, as do all reformers, assumed that social good can be achieved through political action. They ignored the age-old fact that whenever the government does “good” it acts in the interests of some at the expense of others, meanwhile acquiring power for itself. The end product of government intervention in the economy of the country is more power for government.”

“The American brand of socialism known as the New Deal was made possible by the income tax. But with the advent of income taxation, socialism was unavoidable,” wrote Chodorov.

Government never gives up power, it never voluntarily abdicates.

Chodorov offered a solution. According to Chodorov, “Compulsion means force; there must be a policeman to see that the individual does not follow his own inclinations. But policemen must live. Since they do not produce a thing by which they can live, others must support them.”

No plan can be bigger than its bureaucracy.

The only bulwark remaining against bigger federal government is the 10th Amendment – States rights and the will of the people.

Governor Lee stated, “For those of us who still believe that freedom is best, the way is clear: we must concentrate on the correction of the mistake of 1913. The Sixteenth Amendment must be repealed. Nothing less will do.”