Here is the homepage for the OceanStateCurrent.com where I’ve been plying my page.

I’m most impressed with the research Justin and others have pulled together on the Center’s web site.

Link Back to Blog

Rep. Paul Ryan Versus the Unelected

“Unelected.”

That’s a word Rep. Paul Ryan used in the vice-presidential debate last night in response to a question about abortion that should be repeated incessantly on the campaign trail. The non-answers Vice President Joe Biden offered up when Ryan challenged unelected elites who routinely bypass Congress as they reshape public policy suggests the Democrats know they are playing defense on constitutional questions.

Here is what moderator Martha Raddatz asked toward the end of the debate:

“I want to go back to the abortion question here. If the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?”

Instead of accepting the premise of the question, Ryan told Raddatz that it is not the role of the U.S. Supreme Court to reset policy, and that weighty matters like abortion should be subject to an up and down vote in the legislative branch.

“We don’t think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people through their elected representatives in reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process should make this determination.”

In his non-answer, Biden referenced Judge Robert Bork and the potential for new openings on the U.S. Supreme Court. Bork, who was President Reagan’s nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1987, scandalized then Sen. Biden by hewing a bit too closely to what the U.S. Constitution actually says.

Earlier in the debate, when Raddatz asked about Medicare and entitlement reform, Ryan took on Obamacare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

“…they put this new Obamacare board in charge of cutting Medicare each and every year in ways that will lead to denied care for current seniors,” he explained. “This board, by the way, it’s 15 people, the president’s supposed to appoint them next year. And not one of them even has to have medical training.”

(See my previous post on legal challenge to IPAB from the Goldwater Institute)

In his non-answer, Biden referenced Sarah Palin, the GOP’s 2008 presidential nominee, and the “death panel.” But he declined to challenge Ryan on the merits of the IPAB.

“Unelected” is a word that can connect with average voters who are still keen on the idea of “checks and balances” and the “separation of powers” between the various branches.

To paraphrase the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, who joined with Biden, to mount a smear campaign against Judge Bork back in 1987 — “Joe Biden’s America is a land where unelected, unaccountable elites are permitted to operate beyond the boundaries of constitutional restraints to impose big government schemes on an unsuspecting public that would never pass muster in a transparent, open debate.”

Something like that is in order on the campaign trail.

Link to full report

Death Panel Rattle

Until two nights ago, most voters were largely unaware of the unelected 15 member Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) created as part of Obamacare. Mitt Romney can further capitalize on his adroit performance in Wednesday’s debate by focusing public attention on the power and influence of IPAB in the coming weeks.

When he was asked why he wanted to repeal the federal health care law, formally titled the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Romney quite correctly touched on rising insurance costs, and Medicare cuts, but it was his third response to moderator Jim Lehrer that really stood out.

“Number three, it puts in place an unelected board that’s going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have,” Romney said. “I don’t like that idea.”

Anyone who believes in constitutional limited government won’t like the idea either.

The IPAB is charged with developing proposals to “reduce the per capita rate of growth of Medicare spending,” according to the PPACA. The Board’s authority is activated whenever Medicare’s future spending is expected to increase faster than the target rate, which is the average of the change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) until 2018. At that point, the target rate is set to the nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capital plus one percentage point. The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) must implement the Board’s proposals, unless Congress intervenes.

In practice, this means there are few meaningful limits on the IPAB’s ability to shape policy. Obamacare calls for a 3/5 supermajority vote in the U.S. Senate to change or repeal any proposals from the IPAB. The PPACA also prohibits administrative and judicial review of IPAB laws.

This would be worth mentioning in the next debate.

The Goldwater Institute in Arizona is proceeding with a lawsuit — Coons v. Geithner — that challenges the constitutionality of Obamacare on the basis of the IPAB. The suit argues that the board violates the separation of powers. Moreover, Goldwater’s attorneys point out, the federal health care law has been written in such a way to keep the unelected board members permanently entrenched.

In order to repeal the IPAB, Congress must enact a Joint Resolution, but it is prohibited from introducing such a resolution until 2017, and must act no later than Feb. 1 2017. The resolution must be in place no later than Aug. 15, 2017. In the event that a resolution is introduced, PPACA calls for a super-majority vote, meaning 3/5 of all elected members of Congress must support the resolution. Even if a resolution is passed, the Board would not disband until 2020.

“Protecting any new federal agency from being repealed by Congress appears to be unprecedented in the history of the United States,” Clint Bolick, vice president of litigation at the Goldwater Institute, has said. “No possible reading of the Constitution supports the idea of an unelected, standalone federal board that’s untouchable by both Congress and the courts and we will pursue this challenge all the way back to the Supreme Court if necessary.”

There’s plenty of ammunition here for Team Romney.

The link to the full roundup is here.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Clinton takes aim at voter ID in New Hampshire; Obama maintains narrow lead

Anyone who tries to vote illegally in November can expect to encounter New Hampshire’s new photo ID law, approved by the U.S. Department of Justice in September. Approval came despite opposition from Attorney General Eric Holder to block voter identification laws in other states, claiming they are in violation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, or VRA.

Under Section 5, the DOJ has the authority to approve or reject election law changes made in certain parts of the country. The jurisdictions covered under the VRA area are Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia and parts of California, Florida, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, South Dakota, and New Hampshire. The law was initially set up as a safeguard against racial discrimination, but critics charge that Section 5 has been applied unevenly and unfairly.

In June, the Republican-controlled Legislature overrode the veto of Democratic Gov. John Lynch to pass the new voter ID law, which will be gradually phased in.

Voters who do not have a photo ID in the current election cycle will still be permitted to vote, but they must sign an affidavit. Letters will then be sent to any voters whose signature appears on the affidavit requesting confirmation that they voted. If state officials do not receive a response within 90 days of the time when the letter was sent, the attorney general will then conduct an investigation into voter fraud. After Sept. 1, 2013, voters must have a valid photo ID in order to vote.

“We do not see widespread systematic voter fraud,” David Scanlan, the deputy secretary of state, said in an interview. “But there have been isolated cases that have been cause for concern and there is a strong perception out there that it is a serious problem, and that if we don’t check ID’s we are not going to know whether it is taking place.”

Corey Lewandowski, the N.H. state director of Americans for Prosperity, said the new voter ID will help to root out college students who should not be voting.

“There has been a problem with college students who maintain a residence with their parents out of state, but then also get registered to vote here,” he said. “Thanks to the voter ID law, this means they will need to become residents if they want to vote. That’s very helpful.”

Former President Bill Clinton appeared at the University of New Hampshire in Durham, this past Wednesday, where he was critical of the state’s voter ID law. Clinton told students Republicans were trying to take away their right to vote, and they have a large stake in the election.

“Republicans in New Hampshire think it matters,” Clinton said. “That’s why they’ve worked so hard to keep you from voting.”

Since the U.S. Supreme Court has already upheld the constitutionality of voter ID laws in a case involving Indiana, the New Hampshire law is on solid legal footing. The court is expected to take up a challenge to the VRA’s Section 5 in its current term.

Poll Watch: The Real Clear Politics average now has President Obama up by six points. Only the Rasmussen Poll has Romney in front. Former Gov. John Sununu has told members of the press that most of the polls are skewed toward Democrats and that he anticipates Romney to win in a close election. New Hampshire is unique among swing states in that it does not allow early voting. This means the final weeks could be decisive.

Gov. Bobby Jindal passed sweeping education reforms that reverberated across state lines. I felt like I became part of history by covering public policy initiatives that I expect to have a transformative impact.

Links to my reports on the Pelican Post

Click here to view my reports for NetRight Daily, which reach back to 2009.

 The Franklin Center organized a swing state roundup with Human Events Magazine, which is under new leadership. I’ve been asssigned to cover New Hampshire. As it happens, I know one of  the top Republican strategists in the state. I’ve made the most of the opportunity. The coverage began in late Sept. 2012 and runs through Election Day. I’m one of several Franklin Center reporters assigned to the project.

Links to full weekly briefing are below. It should be noted that Voter ID is a factor in New Hampshire. I’ve included my first full report here:

Report on New Hampshire Presidential Campaign

If the trends continue, New Hampshire’s four electoral votes could provide President Barack Obama with a narrow margin of victory on Election Day.   Pollster John Zogby, for instance, has drawn up a scenario that has the Granite State sealing the deal for the Obama-Biden ticket, assuming the Democrats also win Florida.   Obama carried New Hampshire by almost 10 points in 2008, but his lead appears tenuous in a state where ballot integrity efforts and a proposed anti-tax amendment complicate the electoral terrain for Democrats. Moreover, a highly successful conservative insurrection that took down several liberal-leaning statehouse Republicans during the Sept. 11 primary could be indicative of an energized base that makes the difference for Mitt Romney.   Poll Watch: The RealClearPolitics.org average has Obama up by just 4 percentage points over Romney in New Hampshire, which narrowly voted for Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic nominee in 2004, and George W. Bush, the Republican candidate, in 2000.   “New Hampshire is very isolationist, and very anti-war,” Sam Pimm, a field coordinator with the Reagan Coalition, said. “That would help to explain the vote in 2008, but the Republicans came back strong in 2010, and I think the momentum is still on their side with the public now focused on taxes and a poor economy. Romney has every chance to win here, but it will be close.”   Secretary of State William Gardner, a Democrat, purged the voter rolls of dead and ineligible voters in August 2011 — 163,221 voters were dropped from the rolls statewide, according to the Secretary of State’s Office.   “There was a very substantial shift to the Republicans after the January presidential primary earlier this year,” Anthony Stevens, the assistant secretary of state, said. “But this does not have anything to do with the purge. There was more interest in the Republican primary, and undeclared voters who vote in the primary become Republican. New voters may not know this. But it’s possible that many voters do want to become identified as Republicans. There are many factors at work.”   Since Obama settled on Portsmouth to make his first campaign stop after the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., it’s reasonable to conclude that the Democrats aren’t overflowing with confidence in a state that was an easy win a few years ago. Romney held a campaign rally at Holman Stadium in Nashua, N.H., the same day as Obama’s appearance. Vice President Joe Biden is scheduled to make multiple stops in New Hampshire this coming weekend. U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, was scheduled to make an appearance on behalf of Romney on Monday, Sept. 17, in Portsmouth, where he remains popular. Romney’s No. 2, Paul Ryan, is scheduled to be in Dover on Tuesday, Sept. 18.

Sept. 17 Swing State Report

Sept. 24 Swing State Report

Oct. 2 Swing State Report

Read full report at the Pelican Institute for Public Policy.

Read full report at Capital Research Center.

Should Louisiana primarily export or import the vast natural gas supplies that have been harvested in just the past few years?

This question was explored at the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association (LMOGA) annual meeting held in New Orleans last week.

Dr. David Dismukes, associate director and professor at the Louisiana State University (LSU) Center for Energy studies, sees ample room for both. He was one of several speakers who commented on the “unconventional plays” built around the natural gas boom and the Haynesville Shale deposit in particular located in the northwest part of the state.

“As long as we can preserve the policies we have now and facilitate the development of this natural gas, we will have a large enough tent to facilitate these industries,” Dismukes told audience members gathered at the Roosevelt Hotel.

He also said the capital investments that have gone into pipelines, processing and other infrastructure suggest that continued development of natural gas supplies will have continued durability. In addition, Dismukes sees a strong long-term potential for using natural gas with vehicles, but cautions that the sector is still in its earliest stages and requires sustained support and encouragement.

The turnaround in Louisiana, and the country as a whole, is remarkable in light of what leading economic and political figures said just a few years ago, Scott Angelle, secretary of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, said during his presentation. In 2003 testimony before Congress, then Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan declared that there was not enough gas in the U.S. and that the country would need to rely on imports, Angelle informed audience members.

“Think of the generational shift we have experienced,” he observed. “In 2003, the number one economist on the planet said we did not have enough natural gas in America, and seven years later, that’s the snap of a finger, we are talking about seven years where things have changed so dramatically, where instead of importing natural gas we are working and supporting opportunities for exporting natural gas.”

Angelle also acknowledged the ongoing concern some industry officials have about the possibility of suspending the tax exemption for horizontal drilling, but said Gov. Bobby Jindal has made it clear that he would keep the exemption in place. But he did call for policy changes that better accommodate the accelerated pace of natural gas development.

“I don’t think we can build infrastructure quick enough to take advantage of the huge supplies of natural gas,” he said. “Our energy policies are like an aircraft carrier. It takes a long time to change policies. But with our energy policy, we need more of a speedboat mentality, not an aircraft carrier.”

In his talk, Angelle offered up some statistics on natural gas that drove home how strategically vital the Haynesville Shale has become. Out of 19,845 natural gas wells that are active in Louisiana, 1,805 are Haynesville wells, the secretary said. The 1,805 Haynesville are now responsible for 68 percent of production in the state, according to the figures Angelle cited.

The aftermath of the BP oil rig explosion that took place in April 2010 and the subsequent moratorium was another point of discussion throughout the conference. While the regulatory climate in Washington D.C. is always a point of concern, Angelle indicated that rig operators in the Gulf of Mexico had some cause for encouragement.

He noted that Tommy Beaudreau, director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE), received a warm welcome from attendees.

“Director Beaudreau would not have come in my mind, if he did not feel comfortable that he was coming to a place where folks would treat him fairly,” Angelle said.

Even with better cooperation out of Washington D.C., LMOGA president Chris John said in an interview he would prefer to see states have oversight of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling rather than the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

“Each state has its own unique geography and geological formations,” he explained. “Instead of a one size fits all approach from the EPA, we need to let the states and establish the right regulatory environment. Here, I think Louisiana can serve as a model to other of the country because there is a good balance between environmental concerns and energy production.”

The Haynesville Shale has been a success in part because industry officials have been very upfront and transparent about development plans with local residents who are directly effected.

“You have to remember the constituencies are very different in the  Marcellus area instead of say the Gulf where the only constituency you have are the companies,” John explained. “But when you are dealing with neighborhoods, police departments, local governments and mom and pop operations they understandably want to know what this means for their lives and their community. With the right approach, I think people can see that they have a stake in land leases that bring in revenue and open up new opportunities. Transparency is the key because it opens the way to some very strong partnerships.”

Still, after the BP incident, the LMOGA membership is very mindful of the high bar that has been set, he added.

“The norm now in industry is to have no incidents,” John said. But just one incident can be catastrophic and shut everything down.”

Kevin Mooney is  the Capitol Bureau Reporter with the Pelican Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached at kmooney@pelicaninstitute.org and followed on Twitter.