On Wednesday September 3rd of 2008, Rudy Giuliani took to the podium at the GOP convention and laid out his version of the party’s energy policy. When “drill baby drill” escaped his lips, I turned off the television, and your future columnist went to bed. It was the type of moment that made onlookers view the right side of the aisle as a rapacious horde of plunderers who drink petroleum for breakfast. At least the Gingrich mantra of “Drill here, Drill Now, Pay Less” is a softer version that implies a desire for energy independence and lower prices. If conservatives examined their belief system vis-à-vis energy, they would note that a mixture of energy sources creates efficiency and reliability (ostensibly the two major benefits of free markets).
People perceive energy to be like laws and sausage – we’re glad to have them, but we we’re not sure how it’s made. What people know is this – when we flip the switch, something ought to happen. To that end, coal and oil have provided reliable sources of energy. As we add houses, cars, and business parks, we buy more coal and extend the grid.
Having an effective energy policy is a tricky matter, since so many variables go into powering everyday devices. Barring a hurricane, Wal-Mart can tell you how many units they will have of product X at the end of the month. They know how many are sold per day, how many are on order, and how long that order takes to arrive. Energy companies don’t have this luxury. The temperature could be ten degrees warmer or cooler. They just know that their customers want something to happen when they flip the switch.
This arrangement leads to several inefficiencies. At the transmission level, a third of the power produced is wasted. At the user level, there is unforeseen demand and possible changes to customer behavior. For instance, how many people recently purchased more energy efficient appliances or converted to CFL bulbs? These measures do little to save energy from one month to the next. The coal has already been bought and shoveled into the furnace. So in the current arrangement, it takes years for energy companies to account for these changes.
Our Upper and Middle Shore readers should fear not, for there is an end-around to this arrangement that could be an economic boon to the region. Maryland enacted the Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard in 2004. This standard states that renewable energy production must reach twenty percent by 2022. Excess can be sold as credits. This is a true cap and trade system (as opposed to a Trojan horse for an energy tax) that encourages a reliable mixture of renewable and mass produced sources.
As I see it, a public-private collaboration, making use of existing State grants and perhaps a community bank, would allow our utilities to exceed the standard, sell energy credits, and allow customers to share in the windfall through lower energy bills. Economic development opportunities can sometimes come from a strategic initiative that makes effective use of assets. It doesn’t have to come with a neon sign that reads “Economic development happening here. Please drive slowly.”
Kent County is eyeing use of solar energy for its facilities in Worton. This Tuesday, the Commissioners appear set to vote on code home rule bill 5-2011 which reads like a virtual “Homestad Act” for renewable energy. From what I have gleaned from the handful of meetings that I have attended is that Gail Owings, Kent County’s Director of Planning and Zoning, has been on top of this concept. It just goes to show that the closer government gets to being local, the better it gets.
Non-Sequitur (Who gets one of God’s red batphones?): Former NFL’er Sean Gilbert once held out of performing his duties with the Washington Redskins because he claimed God said he should be getting a better deal. In the remaining six years of his career, Gilbert recorded 15.5 sacks. Elite NFL players get this many in one season, and none have claimed divine intervention when it came to their salary.
Michele Bachmann seems to know why we got a hurricane. She also seems to think that God talks to her. I suppose that’s her right. It’s one thing to be guided by faith. It’s another thing altogether to give the impression that your actions might be dictated by it. With the Nation at war against jihadists, I would be leery of anything that perpetuates their perception that this is a holy war. Of course, the State of the Union address could be fun. I’ll let the readers come up with some of those ideas. Anyhow, for those keeping score, that’s a no on Perry and a no on Bachmann.
Non-Sequitur (Now we’re contorting the fourth amendment?): So for every “drill baby drill” moment that makes me question my belief system, I get gems like this that reaffirm it. With 46 million Americans needing food assistance, the window is open to reverse popular sentiment towards welfare programs that were targeted in the Clinton/Contract with America era. At issue is Florida’s law establishing drug testing for welfare recipients, and whether it represents illegal search and seizure. A negative test is reimbursed by the State.
The economic argument is that administering the program actually becomes more expensive. The social argument is that we guarantee benefits are delivered to the most deserving of the population; moreover, that becomes an economic argument, with assurance that benefits will not be used in the course of an illegal habit forming activity.
What drew my attention was the following passage:
Given that cost-benefit reality, it is hard to escape the suspicion that what is really behind the drive to drug-test benefits applicants is a desire to stigmatize the needy. The fact is, there are all sorts of people who benefit from government programs. Businessmen get state contracts, farmers receive crop subsidies and retired state workers receive pensions. The pro-drug-testing movement, however, is focusing exclusively on welfare recipients – an easy target.
The writer has given equal footing to welfare and state contracts. Of course, a contract is consideration given to someone in exchange for goods or services to be provided within an established time frame. If there were community service provisions included in the program, then you would have a contract. Also, there are government contracts with on-boarding requirements that include a drug test and a background check.
Also quotable, “Drug testing welfare applicants does not seem to meet the Chandler test since there is no particular safety reason to be concerned about drug use by welfare recipients.” That’s the type of quote that makes me realize why I’m not Libertarian. For those who didn’t wish to read the full article, the “Chandler test” is based upon a prior case in Michigan. The test sanctions this type of search if it were a matter of security. Based upon the Chandler test, a tax cheat should not be subject to searches and checks that might out him as a tax cheat, even if he were applying at the Treasury.
Anyhow, I think the families of hundreds of Baltimore murder victims would disagree with the writer’s sentiment. I am not suggesting that welfare recipients murder people. I am suggesting that the drug trade is part of a one-two punch that oppresses urban populations. Among that population are truly needy people who are probably apoplectic that others are using public money for illegal activities, ultimately placing their benefits at risk.
This Week’s Football Segment: Your Maryland Terrapins take on what’s left of the Miami Hurricanes. Miami was recently involved in a booster scandal that saw players receiving improper benefits. This has been perceived of Miami for some time. The University, quite aware of its reputation, brought in former HHS Secretary Donna Shalala, to take over as President and restore the school’s reputation. It now appears possible that the captain will go down with the ship.
There are 1,696 roster spots available in the NFL each year. The Maryland Terrapins sport a roster of eighty-five players. There are 120 teams playing college football at the highest level. That’s 10,200 people just playing D1 football. If every player in the NFL retired, 8,504 people would still be unemployed in the football industry. Each year, 224 people are selected to play in the NFL. That’s 2.2% of D1 players.
How are these numbers relevant to the Miami situation? NCAA football is big business with a largely unpaid workforce. Networks and conferences have lucrative broadcast contracts. Successful teams bring application revenues to their respective schools. Many coaches get a good State contract. Boosters with connections to talent agencies, combine with NCAA rules that cap what players can earn in a part-time job, to create an “NFL or bust” environment for many who needed the scholarship as a way out of a questionable situation. Is it any wonder why players take the money? If the NCAA would remove its earnings rules, and simply audit jobs paying above a certain threshold, perhaps more players and programs would operate above board.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
@ Monsieur Troup’er – Is it any wonder why players take the money?
Let’s see if everyone understands that a full ride covers tuition, room & board, a stipend… and a degree from some universities that these student-athletes might not have be able to get accepted to in the first place. And considering that only 5 D-1 programs made a profit each of the years during the last decade… where would all this money come from to ‘pay’ all the athletes on scholarship.
The NCAA will not allow just the football and men’s basketball players to get paid becuase they’re the only ones that make money. And there’s this minor detail of Title IX to consider also.
What’s so ironic about the Miami situation is that the booster who gave a ton of money to the U stole it from his Ponzi scheme victims in the first place.
BTW, plenty of players don’t take the money.
MBTroup says
@WBK – The scholly is their payment for play, point conceded. What makes the U and OSU situations laughable is players taking money and buying things like tats and souped up rides. If the players could earn more than $2,200 in their jobs, we may see more accountability in the world of college athletics. Most don’t take the money, but the ones who do, usually do so because they have been dropped into a situation where they’re surrounded with more money (and people who stand to make it off of you) than they have ever seen before.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
@ Monsieur Troup’er – but the ones who do…
It’s called greed… and not respecting the education that they’re getting for free. It’s all part of this entitlement mentality that is eroding our moral compass in America. Athletes, pols, wall street’ers, etc. Spit is spit.
Cynthia McGinnes says
I agree with no on Perry and no on Bachmann for one reason….neither has ever run a private sector business, and America needs a CEO who has some idea of how to manage a private sector economy on a global basis. Gov.Perry has been in TX political offices as both a Democrat and Republican (how’s that for flip-floppinf) for 26 years. Michelle Bachmann’s private sector experience is mainly as a tax attorney working FOR the IRS.
Keith Thompson says
What makes the OSU and Miami situations not so laughable is that you have a university and athletic departments who are not exercising institutional control over their student athletes. It is very possible to keep athletes away from these bad influences (or kick out the players you can’t keep away from them) but it takes a school making the decision to hire and support athetic directors and coaches who are going to pay as much attention to ethics and academics as they do to winning. It takes more work to do that, but do you really want to hire coaches and ADs who want to take short cuts to winning?
Oddly enough, sometimes the best ADs are the ones who are not popular with the most rabid fans simply because the most rabid fans are the ones who put the most pressure on the school to take short cuts to winning.
rachel says
i have $100 – there are 5 people at my door – they each pay $3 for a drug test, if they pass, they get $23 – if they fail, they get $0…if all 5 pass, i am down $15. sadly, chances are all 5 will not pass so the loss is a risk i am willing to take. starvation and homelessness and loss of custody of children can be amazing motivators for recovery…albeit not a guarantee.
when drug addicts and alcoholics are handed $ – or food cards, gas cards…the $ will go to buy their drug of choice…it really is that simple – if that person can get drugs by other means (ie sex), they will, and they will prob still buy the formula and diapers with the $, but the baby is not in a good living situation.
so – if a person wants money from the state of fla, they have to pass a drug test – chances are the welfare folks are aware said person has a child (children) and will take the children and offer the person a chance at recovery. recovery is possible without rehab – it is sometimes harder to walk into a 12step meeting and stay sober from day 1, but it is possible.
if social services works with a person who really wants recovery they can get the person to a hospital for detox, allow them a seat in an intensive outpatient program (we have IOP in Kent and QA;s) and can help them get to meetings – which are frequent and free. so the state is out of pocket some – but if the person enters recovery with an open mind, life will get better – once clean, the person may still need $ assistance, but with a world of opportunity avail to them. clean, happy, healthy people want to do well and work hard and regain custody of their kids (usually)…they then become employees, taxpayers, consumers…renters…
if an alcoholic/addict is not ready to get sober/clean chances are they won’t.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
Cynthia says: neither has ever run a private sector business.
This is a great concept that the segue from CEO of a private multi-national company would be ideal training to be prez of the USA. The biggest difference is that a CEO can virtually hire and fire anybody including the board of directors… and doesn’t need two thirds vote from anybody to accomplish the mission. Yeah… stockholders get votes, but as long as the CEO is making money for them, the CEO’s can do whatever they want.
Even at the local level, it appears much more difficult to move anything through the system as compared to the private sector… simply because of all the regs staring at them… including some pretty bureaucratic human resource policies. Think about how our education system is run in the US.
So… is Romney the answer? Who else fits your criteria? I’d like for us to give it a try, because the way we’re doing it isn’t working.
rcg says
i have always liked Romney for that reason…
MBTroup says
@Rachel – those first few sentences really frame the issue, and they’re making me think. You’d hope that the State isn’t rooting for positive tests as a cost saving measure. Negative tests are somewhat of an investment to ensure that the most deserving receive benefits. But if the tests are coming back negative at a 95% clip, then are the cost burdens of the tests worth it? In the middle is the reality that the five people you speak of likely make this a zero sum game.
Keith Thompson says
Troup writes, “But if the tests are coming back negative at a 95% clip, then are the cost burdens of the tests worth it?”
If the cost of the tests are less than the benefits potential recipients receive (and I suspect they are), then its a net gain for the state.
I like what Florida is doing in that its beginning to separate the idea of helping people from enabling people. I think rcg’s points on removing the element of enabling can certainly lead to people getting help. As long as they’re being enabled, there’s little incentive to get help.
MBTroup says
@Keith – sez “If the cost of the tests are less than the benefits potential recipients receive (and I suspect they are), then its a net gain for the state.”
Right. That’s accounting that the Time author failed to perform. But I’m sure there’s a percentage of negative tests that makes the process a net loss. So the new question is “If that percentage is exceeded, is that loss worth it?”
rachel says
i say Try it – see how it works – time will tell – the program stipulations can be changed down the road.
Keith Thompson says
Troup writes…”But I’m sure there’s a percentage of negative tests that makes the process a net loss. So the new question is “If that percentage is exceeded, is that loss worth it?”
The factor that comes to mind is that if someone feels they’re likely to fail a drug test, there’s a good chance they will not be willing to submit to onet for fear of being prosecuted and therefore will automatically excuse themselves from the welfare rolls. I think the drug testing requirement weeds out a lot of people, so I think the net loss is worth it.
Stephan Sonn says
Many government programs
that are loosely called “welfare”
are neither means tested or audited
because of the procedural cost of
instituting what amounts to quality control.
After the Civil War entire families
lived as government wards
on a virtual urban plantation
as a street corner labor force
performing day work
when they could get it.
In the best of times
are there jobs
they could perform in
even with training?
If you look in history and the influence of Kipling
via the White Man’s Burden.
There was a kind but condescending attitude
That by default was innately racist
setting the tone for the present class war.
Well, Atlas is shrugging
and Ayn Rand is certainly no Kipling
And the middle class is tossed out
in the bathwater along with the baby.
There is a shortage of true prophets in
the Rave Rue World
But more than enough liars
to erect the current Cross of Gold
Stephan Sonn says
I wonder Mr Kramer if your “try it” comment means that Romney
will have better luck with the Tea party than Obama.
Even after 2012 those still left in the Senate
can still vent havoc.
The Tea Party is monolithic
and against the process Social Democracy for sure.
How about a more traditional partner
like The Mafia?
Was it Churchill who said about the enemy of his time
if they are not kept at your feet
then they will be at your throat.
Warrior Bob Kramer says
@ Mr Sonn says: means that Romney will have better luck with the Tea party than Obama.
Almost all of President Obama’s problems are of his own (un)doing. Blaming the Tea Party for an ineffective foreign policy, a lost energy policy, a non-existent immigration policy… plus continuing two wars without an exit plan seem to be political scapegoating. Does anyone really think that Obama’s job plan is going to be any better than what we’ve already seen from his program offerings?
I voted for ‘hope’ when I voted for Obama in ’08… and I’m still hoping. And as we’ve seen our country can’t run forever on ‘hope’ alone.
BTW… even if he gets re-elected… do you think he’ll accomplish more or less with the GOP’hers controlling both houses?
I don’t think what’s happening in DC now is working. So let’s try something different… and Cynthia made a nice offering.
Stephan Sonn says
Congratulations Warrior, your conversion is complete.
Stephan Sonn says
Thinking about it for a few minutes,
yours was an easy sale.
Right on script.
Stephan Sonn says
In the spirit of calling all the chickens home to roost
has there ever been an assault as organized, vicious and guileful
launched against a sitting president of the United States
and by proxy the concept of social democracy that has evolved
and flourished in the last two centuries of the Western Civilization?
There are a lot of really nice folks who spin and sin
for the Tea Party and its Tory sponsors.
It seems to be boiling down to a Peers and Help Nation
with no upward economic mobility for young people
not yet too jaded to actually think.
It is amazing how many “nice people”
pretending to be civilized,
propose and promote the horrors of their
Cross of Gold agenda on the rest of us.
MBTroup says
“has there ever been an assault as organized, vicious and guileful
launched against a sitting president of the United States”
-I’m sure Misters Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, and Kennedy would disagree with that assertion.
-Johnson and Clinton were impeached.
-Seems like the hippie movement wasn’t terribly friendly to administrations.
-A stroll down Wisconsin Ave and looking at lamp posts from AU to Georgetown contains as many bumper stickers lambasting the last guy as I see on cars roasting the current one.
Interesting that you quoted William Jennings Bryan. You’ve seen what a decade of deficits has done to the price of gold, yes? Anyhow, my suggestion would be that if one finds the tea party to be so intellectually insignificant, that for one’s own health, so much attention shouldn’t be paid to them. Maybe I’ll do a nugget on this next week, and it can morph into a discussion about green energy 🙂
Stephan Sonn says
Your well thought comment is short on flaws
save one or two or maybe three.
First i do not respond to Liberal Green Treats, Pavlov Style
Second this assignation of Obama by paid media and operatives is beyond
anything in history in scope and style unless you want to count in Hitler’ home movies
The difference today is the blanketing rise of media and communications technology.
Third One’s health is statistically if not personally fine Mr Ryan.
Regarding your role in general I offer this opinion:
Unlike another more transparent person posting here
and fancies himself your blog buddy and peer
Your intellect is larger
than the limits of your political perspective.
Too bad you constantly bail out the dinghy.
You need a bigger boat
You would make a great Lib… ahh! Centrist.
But that is just my humble opinion :~}
MBTroup says
“The difference today is the blanketing rise of media and communications technology.”
Bingo. Much of the “paid media and operatives” is derivative of the post Woodward/Bernstein world where networks constantly pursue “gotcha” moments (e.g. Dan Rather, Andrew Breitbart). The electorate is no longer willing to accept “Because I’m the President, dammit” as an excuse, yet seeks entertainment from an otherwise unentertaining realm. This is what we have at FOX AND MSNBC – a journalism entertainment hybrid.
I suppose opinion pieces in “the new media” are not above this criticism either 😉
Wonder if FDR would have seen four elections if the cable networks were their to talk the court packing scheme to death?
MBTroup says
“..there to talk…”
Sorry! Sorry everybody!
Stephan Sonn says
It seems to me that court packing failed when FDR overreached.
Regarding the Tea Party and putting histrionics aside
I can’t believe that any astute person could mistake
theirs and proxy operatives and ploys main stream.
They have crossed the line and they are the tail
that wags legitimate Republican party
We not only have journalism hybrids but
impostors in the temple as well
Stephan Sonn says
Micheal
You may want to read
Impostors In The Temple
Circa 1993
It happens to be a very legitimate conservative piece
about Grant Based Pseudo Academia.
As it happens I agree with it.
There is something to be said for
not being a prisoner of dogma.
Stephan Sonn says
Looks like all the tavern chairs are stacked on table tops…for this thread
Since i seem to be talking to myself., It is exit stage left for me
unless it gets more interesting as the election approaches.
Briggs says
Kent County is eyeing use of solar energy for its facilities in Worton. This Tuesday, the Commissioners appear set to vote on code home rule bill 5-2011 which reads like a virtual “Homestead Act” for renewable energy. From what I have gleaned from the handful of meetings that I have attended is that Gail Owings, Kent County’s Director of Planning and Zoning, has been on top of this concept. It just goes to show that the closer government gets to being local, the better it gets.
Mr Troup,
Your observations are spot on. Kent County government and Board of Ed are collaborating on a project to install 1.5 megawatts of clean, renewable solar energy production at the Worton “campus”, and at no up-front cost to either entity. Estimated cost savings begin with $85,000 in the first year, and perhaps as much as a couple of million over 20 years. What’s not to like.
Much of what is happening in this arena is a result of a forward-looking state initiative regarding net metering, which allows producers of clean electricity to sell the excess power back to the grid at a reasonable price. The law also allows for “aggregate metering” for municipalities, non-profits, and agricultural concerns. These entities can now aggregate all of their meters into one account and offset the power required for them with one large solar (or wind) system, rather than lots of smaller ones, and take advantage of economy of scale. Kent County (thanks in part to Ms Owings) has recognized this advantage and has reset its land use ordinances to allow for such projects, which in the long run will assist the county in avoiding ever-rising costs for electricity produced by out-of-date coal-fired plants that operate far away from the Eastern Shore and contribute so much acid rain to the degradation of our precious land.
To Warrior Bob:
“I don’t think what’s happening in DC now is working. So let’s try something different…”
Have a look at this site: americanselect.org Now here is something different!