Crossroads, Chamber attack Reaganites.
By Jeffrey Lord – 1.2.14
Happy New Year.
While America was celebrating the holidays, the Wall Street Journal ran a page one story the day after Christmas headlined as follows:
GOP, Business Recast Message
Republican Leaders, Allies Aim to Diminish Clout of Most-Conservative Activists
The story said this right up front:
Meanwhile, major donors and advocacy groups, such as the Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads, are preparing an aggressive effort to groom and support more centrist Republican candidates for Congress in 2014’s midterm elections.
Karl Rove (i.e., architect of the American Crossroads SuperPAC), the Chamber of Commerce, and the Washington GOP Establishment have declared war on the Reaganite conservative base of the Republican Party.
Welcome to the 2014 election.
An election which, by all accounts, both historically and in terms of the specifics of President Obama’s sinking ratings, should be a winner — a big winner — for the GOP.
Unless there is a deliberate, willful attempt to sabotage the GOP from within. Using the GOP Establishment as a launching pad to ensure that Reagan-style conservatives — the base of the Republican Party — are defeated by Establishment, statist Republicans. Republicans who will in turn so anger the GOP base that the base simply refuses to turn out in November. Thus handing President Obama and the statist forces of Big Government a victory they should never have had and in fact would be unable to earn on their own.
The GOP Establishment wins under the ruse of being… honest, they promise, cross-their-hearts-and-hope-to-die… conservative. And then they do the inevitable… the usual… GOP version of the Socialist Deal. Being “realistic”… seeking (Margaret Thatcher’s hated word) “consensus.”
Harrumph, yada yada yada and all of that.
This isn’t rocket science.
Let’s be candid here, shall we?
This is the latest round in the GOP civil war that has been ongoing for decades.
And, while that WSJ story does not mention Mr. Rove by name, the name of American Crossroads — the Rove-created SuperPAC — is mentioned front and center in this story.
Back in February of 2013 the New York Times ran this story on Mr. Rove’s Crossroads group, describing it as follows:
The biggest donors in the Republican Party are financing a new group to recruit seasoned candidates and protect Senate incumbents from challenges by far-right conservatives and Tea Party enthusiasts who Republican leaders worry could complicate the party’s efforts to win control of the Senate.
…The group, the Conservative Victory Project, is intended to counter other organizations that have helped defeat establishment Republican candidates over the last two election cycles.”
The Conservative Victory Project, which is backed by Karl Rove and his allies who built American Crossroads into the largest Republican super PAC of the 2012 election cycle, will start by intensely vetting prospective contenders for Congressional races to try to weed out candidates who are seen as too flawed to win general elections.
The backlash against American Crossroads was considerable. The very fact of the New York Times piece signaled the Reagan base of the GOP — these days called the Tea Party — that the GOP Washington Establishment was out to undercut Reaganites as the war against GOP statists picked up steam.
Now that 2014 has arrived, the WSJ story indicates the war on Reagan conservatives by the Bush/Ford/Rockefeller wing of the GOP is on again in earnest. Over at Breitbart, Tony Lee reported another aspect of this story, headlined as follows:
Karl Rove’s Crossroads Reloading Against Tea Party
Even though Karl Rove’s American Crossroads brand has been damaged after the group declared war against conservative candidates, the group will reportedly try to influence the 2014 midterm elections by bullying campaigns and creating groups that, on the surface, do not seem to be affiliated with them.
According to the New York Times, Crossroads “appears to be testing” its “new approach” in Kentucky. The Conservative Victory Project, the group formed to take on conservative candidates, has stayed out of Kentucky’s Senate primary between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Tea Party challenger Matt Bevin. Instead, a group called “Kentuckians for Strong Leadership” is curiously backing McConnell while getting most of its cash from Crossroads donors. It is “legally separate from Crossroads”; but Stephen Law, the president of Crossroads, sits on its board, and the two groups share a treasurer.
Crossroads may set up “similar groups in races in which its brand may be less appealing to voters or donors.” The Times notes that this is an approach Crossroads may have to take because Rove’s organization has been so tarnished among the conservative base that candidates fear donors will not contribute to any group associated with him.
In other races, Crossroads has been threatening Senate candidates, saying the group and its affiliates will not support them if they accept support from other super PACs. According to the Times, Law warned a Republican West Virginia Senate candidate (Rep. Shelly Moore Capito) that if her campaign formed its own super PAC, Crossroads would not offer it support.
So even if it appears on the surface that Mr. Rove and the GOP Establishment have taken a pass on primary X, in fact Crossroads, the Chamber and other tentacles of the GOP Establishment may be well present and accounted for by another name. Actively seeking to sabotage conservative candidates exactly as the Breitbart story pinpoints in detail with the Kentucky Senate race.
Let’s be clear.
This isn’t some petty squabble over the personality of candidate A versus candidate B. This is decidedly not about the ineptness of, say, Missouri’s Todd Akin (whom we urged to withdraw after his rape nonsense). Notice that none of the losing moderate candidates from 2012, whether Mitt Romney at the top or in various Senate or House races, are being cited by the Establishment as problems.
This is about whether the Republican Party will abandon its Reagan/conservative base — the base that elected Reagan in two landslides, Reagan’s vice president (running as Reagan’s heir) in a 1988 landslide, the Gingrich Revolution in 1994 and made John Boehner Speaker of the House in 2010 — to become Republican socialists, a paler version of the Obama/statist party. Obama Lite. Unwilling not only to challenge the President’s left-wing agenda but insisting on acceptance of that agenda — just a cheaper, better managed version of it.
This is exactly how the nation got into its $17 trillion debt in the first place — not to mention repeated GOP defeats at the polls — with too many Republicans using their time in office not to keep pledges of limited government but rather to grow the government. And the debt and deficit that went along with it.
As we have noted before, this fight is a mirror image of the battle that occurred in Britain between the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and the “wets” — moderates — of her own British Conservative Party.
After the Tories lost the 1974 elections to Labour, in 1975 as she prepared to challenge Edward Heath — the Gerald Ford of British Conservatives — Mrs. Thatcher penned a column for the Daily Telegraph that said, in part, this:
Indeed, one of the reasons for our electoral failure is that people believe too many Conservatives have become socialists already. Britain’s progress towards socialism has been an alternation of two steps forward with half a step back…And why should anyone support a party that seems to have the courage of no convictions?
Americanize Thatcher’s point and this is exactly the problem posed by Mr. Rove, American Crossroads and the Chamber of Commerce.
To Americanize Mrs. Thatcher: Indeed, one of the reasons for our electoral failure is that people believe too many Republicans have become socialists already.
Again, as pointed out before in this space, Mr. Rove is a symbol of this problem. When the Ted Cruz-Mike Lee-led effort to defund Obamacare was gaining steam, the GOP Establishment was out there saying that the way to do this was not to defund Obamacare but to win elections that gave the GOP control of the White House and Congress.
Left unsaid was the fact that once upon a time, when Mr. Rove himself was the White House Deputy Chief of Staff in the Bush 43 era, the GOP did in fact have control of the House and Senate both.
Was, to pick one example, the Department of Education abolished? No. In fact, Mr. Rove boasts in his memoirs of expanding the Department with the passage of No Child Left Behind, legislation that was passed by partnering with then-Senator Ted Kennedy, the “Liberal Lion” of the Senate. And oh yes, a GOP Congressman named…John Boehner.
In other words, given 100% control of the federal government, something Reagan never had, the GOP went out of its way not to limit the growth of the federal government — but to expand it. As it were, the GOP Establishment joined hands with the other side.
This is exactly the problem Margaret Thatcher spent a career fighting. Not to mention Ronald Reagan. As Mrs. Thatcher’s ally, the late Sir Keith Joseph called it, this was the “socialist ratchet” effect. Assuming office on a so-called “conservative” platform, British Conservatives and American Republicans immediately settled in to assimilate the last spurt of government growth from the preceding Labour or Democrat administration — and then expand it.
Which brings us back to these stories in the Wall Street Journal and at Breitbart.
What these stories are exactly describing is a massive war on the conservative base of the GOP in 2014 by the people Ronald Reagan labeled the “fraternal order” or “pastel” Republicans.
And what happens if they succeed? Assuming they don’t ignite a furious backlash that costs the GOP the election?
The Republican Party can control every last seat in Congress after 2014 and the White House in 2016 — and it will not make a lick of difference. Because just as occurred when Rove was a man with clout in the White House and John Boehner was on an earlier ladder of the GOP House leadership passing No Child Left Behind with Teddy Kennedy — the Washington GOP Establishment will do everything they can to fight efforts to limit the size and growth of the federal government.
Why is this?
The answer is as simple as it is blunt. Follow the money.
The major industry — the trough, if you will — in Washington, D.C. is the big, bloated federal government.
And groups like the US Chamber of Commerce wallow in this trough. A few days before Christmas Mark Levin spent some time focusing on this issue, correctly pointing out that the Chamber, the epitome of the GOP Establishment, was “not about capitalism, they’re about cronyism.”
Over at OpenSecrets.org, one learns that the Chamber has been busy funneling its nominally conservative cash to…yes…Democrats. Specifically the Democratic Governors Association and the Democratic State Attorneys General Association. And here in the Los Angeles Times — back in 2010 — was this story headlined:
Republican-leaning U.S. Chamber of Commerce buys ads supporting Democrats
The story went on to say:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has been a powerful ally for Republican candidates in this year’s midterm campaigns, quietly moved across the aisle this week and bought ads touting nearly a dozen Democratic House members.
Mind you, 2010 was the year of the Tea Party rebellion that gave the House GOP its majority and produced Speaker Boehner. And the Chamber of Commerce was out there giving some $1,899,772 for those “nearly a dozen Democratic House members” — all of whom had cast their votes to make Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the House.
This kind of thing is exactly why Mark Levin said the Chamber is “not about capitalism, they’re about cronyism” and continued:
We need to shake up that place like it’s never been shaken before. And the problem with groups like the United States Chamber of Commerce is they’re not conservative, they’re about business. They’re not about capitalism, they’re about cronyism. The reason there is a United States Chamber of Commerce is so they can get Congress to cut deals for them, or the White House to cut deals for them, or the bureaucracy to cut deals for them. That’s what they’re there for.
Mark went on to say of the Chamber:
They’re part of the problem. The idea that big companies are necessarily conservative is absurd. Who do you think funds the left? Who do you think funds the Democrat Party? Or, all their little organizations? Big businesses do. Corporatists do. They’re trying to buy favors. That’s what they do…
Mark is correct.
But it would be considerably wrong to leave the impression this is simply about the Chamber of Commerce and American Crossroads.
The fact of the matter is that Washington is laced with Republican lobbyists who are paid big bucks to lobby the federal government for client A or B. They may even give lip service to the idea of “limited government.” But to seriously limit the government would be to cut off a very handsome way of living for these GOP lobbyists. Which is why when serious conservative Republicans — today’s Tea Party members for example — actually make it to Congress, the GOP Establishment gets the cold sweats.
Which brings us back full circle to the real problem, as seen in this story in the New York Times from the period of the 2013 government shutdown headlined:
Business Groups See Loss of Sway Over House G.O.P.
Reports the Times:
WASHINGTON — As the government shutdown grinds toward a potential debt default, some of the country’s most influential business executives have come to a conclusion all but unthinkable a few years ago: Their voices are carrying little weight with the House majority that their millions of dollars in campaign contributions helped build and sustain.
This kind of reality terrifies the GOP Establishment. Listen to this quote from — shocker — the top lobbyist for the Chamber of Commerce, Bruce Josten. The Times quotes him this way, bold print for emphasis supplied here:
“What we want is a conservative business person, but someone who in many respects will be more realistic, in our opinion,” said Bruce Josten, the top lobbyist at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the single biggest lobbying organization in Washington.
….“The name calling, blame gaming — using slurs like jihadist, terrorist, cowards, that kind of language — it does not get you to a deal,” Mr. Josten said of the advice he is giving to Democrats and Republicans.”
Catch the phrases? The words “more realistic” and “deal”? This isn’t simply Inside-the-Beltway language — this is the coded language of what Reagan once disparaged as the “fraternal order” Republicans. It is exactly what Margaret Thatcher was referring to when she said “too many Conservatives have become socialists already.”
Mr. Josten, Mr. Rove, the groups they are connected to are speaking the language of Republican socialists.
What Mr. Josten is saying in his own fashion is that he has accepted the “socialist ratchet” method of governing. He wants — and the Chamber he represents wants — no part of reversing this Leftist governing assumption. Josten’s job, the Chamber’s role, is simply to be in Washington and make “deals,” to be “realistic.”
The $17 trillion debt? The $90 trillion in unfunded liabilities? Hey, no big deal. Let’s manicure the next budget deal a tad and move on.
And ever further into the hole.
This was exactly the method of government Ronald Reagan — perhaps one of the first modern Tea Party activists before there was a modern Tea Party — saw as the problem. And that problem is now getting worse by the day, setting up Americans for a massive economic free-fall.
Let’s cut to the chase, shall we?
These various stories that popped up in the Wall Street Journal and at Breitbart over the holidays about Karl Rove, American Crossroads, and the Chamber of Commerce are about, to Americanize Thatcher, nothing more-or-less than Republican Socialism.
They are not about changing Washington — they are Washington. They talk a great game about limited government, but as noted, when they had 100% charge of the federal government in the Bush years they set about not limiting government but expanding government.
The real reason these people will be out there trying to defeat Reaganite conservatives/Tea Partier candidates is precisely because these candidates in victory have shown themselves to be a direct threat to the Washington way of doing business. So job one for the GOP Establishment is to deliberately pick Republican socialist candidates — candidates who are perfectly happy to talk the talk but once in Washington will refuse flatly to do what they promised to do.
As the 2014 election year proceeds, we will have many opportunities to spot these Republican Socialist candidates and their backers at work out there, just as our friends at Breitbart put a spotlight on the behind-the-scenes machinations of American Crossroads in the Kentucky Senate race.
The 2014 elections should be a bumper year for the GOP.
But it will quickly turn to disaster if those who are intent on making this year a victory for Republican Socialism get their way — and in turn drive the Reagan conservative base away from the polls.
Suffice to say?
The battle is on.
November 7, 2012
By: David Light
The far left, socialists and communists have attacked the USA from within for years and, with this election, have succeeded in changing our once great Republic, into a Socialist state. The tipping point has been reached.
Many factors contributed to our demise, the indoctrination of our youth being just one of them. Radicals of the sixties became entrenched in our colleges and universities and left leaning unions corrupted our K-12 school teachers (not all, but enough). Curriculums were changed, substituting social welfare subjects for history, thus eliminating any reference our children may have had of the greatness of our Country’s past and the meaning of our Constitution, our Republic and our capitalist society.
The conscious willingness by our leaders to refuse to protect our borders has destroyed the fundamental of assimilation that was the hallmark of our formal immigration policy. We have now become a come one, come all squatter society that is creating a drain on our once great economy. By failing to restrict voting to citizens only, the far left has created just another block to pander to.
The administration has spent millions advertising their mortgage bailouts, free phones, food stamp, disability and welfare programs in order to create an ever increasing entitlement society, the basis of a Socialist state.
This election has also been a tipping point for the left leaning media. Not even pretending to perform investigative reporting on Fast and Furious, and the Benghazi attack, and actually hiding damaging information from the public, they have become just another arm of the far left establishment. A candidate fighting and beating an incumbent is extremely difficult, but at the same time, by having your campaign being sabotaged by the MSM, it becomes nearly a hopeless task.
We now have entrenched in our national political structure, far left ideologues who are students of Cloward-Piven, and Saul Alinsky, proponents of the theory of doing whatever it takes to achieve a goal. For months the President’s campaign bombarded the airways in the swing states with character assassination ads and the President lied repeatedly in the debates with no rebuke from the media. No one will ever know the effects of the Romney votes that mysteriously came up Obama on a number of touch screens across the country or other shenanigans perpetrated by the myriad of voter registration organizations formerly known as ACORN.
And, although the House of Representatives is still in the hands of the opposition party, it has been weakened by the seemingly unlawful acts of Harry Reid in the Senate who has blocked every attempt by the House to get a budget passed, a legal requirement that would negate the necessity for continuing resolutions raising the debt ceiling in order to keep the government running. This tactic is being used to demonize those heartless Republicans when they fight to keep our taxes and spending down. Additionally, the President has taken it upon himself to create legislation through Executive orders and EPA and other agency regulations, thus circumventing Congress, a tactic many believe is unconstitutional.
Can any of this be reversed? No one knows, but the tipping point has been reached.
Suggested by the author:
- The MSM, Barack Obama, Saul Alinsky, and the price of denial
- Election 2012: President Barack Obama wins re-election
- Newark Mayor Booker softens criticism of Obama campaign tactic
- Democrat Nazi tactics asking Americans to spy and dig up dirt on Republicans
- The tipping point has been reached (republicmainstreet.wordpress.com)
- Who Is Barack Hussein Obama? And What Is He Really Up To? (americanthinker.com)
- Obama’s Banker’s Policy Strategy Is To Put All Of America Into Jail: Barry Taught “Destroy Middle Class”! (politicalvelcraft.org)
- Rep. Allen West Ascribes Saul Alinsky Conspiracy Theory to Lower Unemployment Rate (redalertpolitics.com)
- Welcome To The New United Socialist Paradise States Of America (buzzfeed.com)
- Obama Taught “Destroy Middle Class” (righttruth.typepad.com)
Posted in AMERICAS, Cartoon of the Day, Cultural Revolution "FORWARD", Drone, Drug Cartel's, Eco-socialism, Economic collapse, Economic planning, Economic policy, Fiscal Cliff, Foreign Policy, Fossil Fuels, Fraud & Corruption, Graphic of the Day, Medicare, National Security, NDAA, North America, ObamaCare, Obamanomics, Political economy, Poor, Pork, Progressive "nudge", Progressive Agenda, Social Security, Tax Payer's Dime, Tax Policy, Terrorism, UnAmerican, United States, United States Constitution
by Conn Carroll Senior Editorial Writer
Today, in Osawatomie, Kansas, President Obama will invoke Teddy Roosevelt as a model for his 2012 reelection campaign. Over 100 years ago, after leaving the White House, Roosevelt delivered a seminal speech, titled “The New Nationalism,” which would become the foundation for the Progressive Party he would later create to challenge President Taft’s reelection. Obama plans to identify with those same progressive roots today as he calls for higher taxes on the rich and more government control of the economy.
At the White House press briefing yesterday, spokesman Jay Carney said Obama, “Thinks it’s an opportune time and an opportune location to try to put into broader perspective the kind of debates we’ve been having and the issues that are of vital importance to give middle-class Americans the kind of fair shot that they deserve.” Obama will no doubt echo Roosevelt’s call for a “equality of opportunity” and recycle the speech’s “square deal” rhetoric.
But while there are many parts of Roosevelt’s New Nationalism speech that will sound great to modern ears, there are also many passages that will grate on independent voters:
Combinations in industry are the result of an imperative economic law which cannot be repealed by political legislation. The effort at prohibiting all combination has substantially failed. The way out lies, not in attempting to prevent such combinations, but in completely controlling them in the interest of the public welfare.
This, I know, implies a policy of a far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had, but I think we have got to face the fact that such an increase in governmental control is now necessary.
These words are as radical today as they were 100 years ago. When text of Roosevelt’s New Nationalism reached New York, The New York Times called it “Roosevelt’s Super-Socialism.” Don’t count on that paper using a similar description of Obama’s speech today.
- Obama to Echo Roosevelt in Speech (politics.blogs.foxnews.com)
- Teddy Roosevelt a Bad Omen for Obama? (usnews.com)
- Watch Live & Respond: President Obama’s Economy Speech in Osawatomie, Kansas (whitehouse.gov)
- Obama to channel Roosevelt’s ‘New Nationalism’ (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
- Obama to Push Theodore Roosevelt Style Fair Share Class Warfare Super Speech Tuesday (votingamerican.wordpress.com)
- Grab Your Barf Bags America! Obama To Give Yet Another Class Warfare Attack Speech (ireporters.wordpress.com)
- Obama echoes Roosevelt in his bid to lead the nation into a new era (smh.com.au)
- Obama Is About To Give A Huge Class Warfare Speech (businessinsider.com)
Tags: Barack Obama, Communism, Economic progressivism, Jay Carney, Nationalism, New Nationalism, Obama, Osawatomie Kansas, Political economy, President Barack Obama, President Obama, Progressive, progressive movement, Socialism, Socialists, Tax Payer's Dime, The New Nationalism, Theodore Roosevelt, White House
China’s Superior Economic Model
The free-market fundamentalist economic model is being thrown onto the trash heap of history.
By ANDY STERN
Andy Grove, the founder and chairman of Intel, provocatively wrote in Businessweek last year that, “Our fundamental economic beliefs, which we have elevated from a conviction based on observation to an unquestioned truism, is that the free market is the best of all economic systems—the freer the better. Our generation has seen the decisive victory of free-market principles over planned economies. So we stick with this belief largely oblivious to emerging evidence that while free markets beat planned economies, there may be room for a modification that is even better.”
The past few weeks have proven Mr. Grove’s point, as our relations with China, and that country’s impact on America’s future, came to the forefront of American politics. Our inert Senate, while preparing for the super committee to fail, crossed the normally insurmountable political divide to pass legislation to address China’s currency manipulation. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Gov. Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama all weighed in with their views—ranging from warnings that China must “end unfair discrimination” (Mrs. Clinton) to complaints that the U.S. has “been played like a fiddle” (Mr. Romney) and that China needs to stop “gaming” the international system (Mr. Obama).
As this was happening, I was part of a U.S.-China dialogue—a trip organized by the China-United States Exchange Foundation and the Center for American Progress—with high-ranking Chinese government officials, both past and present. For me, the tension resulting from the chorus of American criticism paled in significance compared to reading the emerging outline of China’s 12th five-year plan. The aims: a 7% annual economic growth rate; a $640 billion investment in renewable energy; construction of six million homes; and expanding next-generation IT, clean-energy vehicles, biotechnology, high-end manufacturing and environmental protection—all while promoting social equity and rural development.
Some Americans are drawing lessons from this. Last month, the China Daily quoted Orville Schell, who directs the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society, as saying: “I think we have come to realize the ability to plan is exactly what is missing in America.” The article also noted that Robert Engle, who won a Nobel Prize in 2003 for economics, has said that while China is making five-year plans for the next generation, Americans are planning only for the next election.
The world has been made “flat” by the technological miracles of Andy Grove, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. This has forced all institutions to confront what is clearly the third economic revolution in world history. The Agricultural Revolution was a roughly 3,000-year transition, the Industrial Revolution lasted 300 years, and this technology-led Global Revolution will take only 30-odd years. No single generation has witnessed so much change in a single lifetime.
The current debates about China’s currency, the trade imbalance, our debt and China’s excessive use of pirated American intellectual property are evidence that the Global Revolution—coupled with Deng Xiaoping’s government-led, growth-oriented reforms—has created the planet’s second-largest economy. It’s on a clear trajectory to knock America off its perch by 2025.
As Andy Grove so presciently articulated in the July 1, 2010, issue of Businessweek, the economies of China, Singapore, Germany, Brazil and India have demonstrated “that a plan for job creation must be the number-one objective of state economic policy; and that the government must play a strategic role in setting the priorities and arraying the forces of organization necessary to achieve this goal.”
The conservative-preferred, free-market fundamentalist, shareholder-only model—so successful in the 20th century—is being thrown onto the trash heap of history in the 21st century. In an era when countries need to become economic teams, Team USA’s results—a jobless decade, 30 years of flat median wages, a trade deficit, a shrinking middle class and phenomenal gains in wealth but only for the top 1%—are pathetic.
This should motivate leaders to rethink, rather than double down on an empirically failing free-market extremism. As painful and humbling as it may be, America needs to do what a once-dominant business or sports team would do when the tide turns: study the ingredients of its competitors’ success.
While we debate, Team China rolls on. Our delegation witnessed China’s people-oriented development in Chongqing, a city of 32 million in Western China, which is led by an aggressive and popular Communist Party leader—Bo Xilai. A skyline of cranes are building roughly 1.5 million square feet of usable floor space daily—including, our delegation was told, 700,000 units of public housing annually.
Meanwhile, the Chinese government can boast that it has established in Western China an economic zone for cloud computing and automotive and aerospace production resulting in 12.5% annual growth and 49% growth in annual tax revenue, with wages rising more than 10% a year.
For those of us who love this country and believe America has every asset it needs to remain the No. 1 economic engine of the world, it is troubling that we have no plan—and substitute a demonization of government and worship of the free market at a historical moment that requires a rethinking of both those beliefs.
America needs to embrace a plan for growth and innovation, with a streamlined government as a partner with the private sector. Economic revolutions require institutions to change and maybe make history, because if they stick to the status quo they soon become history. Our great country, which sparked and wants to lead this global revolution, needs a forward looking, long-term economic plan.
The imperative for change is simple. As Andy Grove pointed out: “If we want to remain a leading economy, we change on our own, or change will continue to be forced upon us.”
Mr. Stern was president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and is now a senior fellow at Columbia University’s Richman Center.
Tags: ANDY STERN, Communist Party of China, communists, Eco-socialism, Economic progressivism, Labor unions, Political economy, President Barack Obama, seiu, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Socialists, Utility Workers Union of America
Earlier this week, a proposal to implement a moratorium on shale gas development by the by the far-right nationalist Ataka party was voted down by the Bulgarian Parliament.
Ataka leader Volen Shopov derided Borisov in Parliament calling on him to: “Give Chevron back their bribe, if you took one.”
Chevron Corp. won a tender for a shale gas deposit in northeastern Bulgaria, offering the government 30-million-euros to explore a concession in a large section of Dobrudzha, in the north east of the country.
Now, the Bulgarian Socialist Party has tabled a draft bill envisaging a ban on shale gas exploration and production and revoking award to Chevron.
The left-wing party said that it is following the path of its French socialist brethren and their experience with successfully imposing a ban on hydraulic fracturing.
Under the draft bill, the government is required to table annual reports on the exploration and production of hydrocarbon liquids and gases, the methods used in the process and their impact on the environment by March 30.
Companies that have already conducted shale gas exploration and production activities with or without a permit must submit detailed reports with the Ministry of Economy, Energy and Tourism within one month of the law’s entry into force.
The Socialists had made reconsideration of shale gas activities a key party of their platform in the October 23rd presidential election, which saw their candidate, former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Prime Minister Ivaylo Kalfin go down to defeat. Kalfin has pledged to initiate a national referendum on shale gas drilling and production in Bulgaria.
The small, conservative party Order, Law and Justice (RZS) has also proposed legislation banning shale gas drilling.
- US Shales: Whether its a Revolution of Evolution, Shale Gas Delivers (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Greece Investigates Shale Gas (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Gas Natural Fenosa Deals with Cheniere Energy to Buy US Shale Gas Sourced LNG (mb50.wordpress.com)
- Gas Natural Fenosa Deals with Cheniere Energy to Buy US Shale Gas Sourced LNG (mb50.wordpress.com)