Fisker's Aptly Named Car Shows the Folly of Government

For the last 6 years, Delawareans have been barraged with promises from so-called "Green companies", most of which promised lofty job numbers and economic booms.  Blue Water Wind came to town with a plan to provide wind energy that would be clean and green and could even eliminate the need for dirty coal fired plants.  Their scheme turned out to be one that would produce far less energy than expected, one that required the government to enforce a mandate on Delmarva Power which forced them to pay more, one that required the federal government to give the company a non-compete contract for the off-shore wind farm location and one that ultimately failed just days ago when the project did not receive MORE government assistance in the form of more direct subsides.  Despite receiving awards of more than $800 million (although we can't be sure how much of it was spent on the project, how much went into the pockets of government cronies or how much the government still has, if Solyndra is any example, that money is long gone) of which we know that enough was used to pay at least 6 executives making 6 figures plus their assistants for 6 years (likely around $4 million) plus the cost of lobbyists, legislators (this is not a typo), architects, lawyers and surveyors for the ramp up to production (which likely cost Delmarva ratepayers millions more), Blue Water Wind needed MORE government funding just to begin production on a surveying tower to see if their idea would ever generate a single kilowatt of power!  After Solyndra, the government realized that green energy problems (like those that plagued Spain, the nation whose green jobs plan bankrupted their nation and after whom Obama's green jobs plan is modeled) would cause more scrutiny and so they decided to cut funding to this off shore wind disaster.  Subsequently, Blue Water Wind folded because they were unable to secure private backing (despite the assurances of company leaders who promised that it would be able to function without government support) for their venture.  Their contract with Delmarva ended 2 days ago at the stroke of midnight and along with it, any chance that we'd see a dime from the investment returned.

More recently, the buzz has been about the Obama crony run car company, Fisker.  You might remember Fisker (or more likely not) as the start-up company who out muscled Tesla as the Obama Administrations favorite in the Plug-in electric car market.  It bought (on the cheap) the Boxwood Road site formerly owned by GM and has been rehabbing it in preparation to begin production on the "cheaper" of its two offerings, the Nina (the more expensive Karma is made in Finland because Fisker says that no one in America can do the job...) in 2013.  The Karma is offered for sale at Union Park's family of dealerships in Wilmington.  A friend of mine recently tried to secure a test drive of one of the Fisker Karma's at Union Park only to find each time that he came by, that the vehicle was "in the shop" for some kind of software upgrade or maintenance issue (odd for a showroom car that is never driven).  Now, this friend may or may not have the means to purchase the vehicle, I don't get into that kind of thing but if I had to guess, I would say his credit record and history would warrant at least a test drive of almost any vehicle ever built.  The Karma retails for more than $102,000 and less than 300 have yet been sold.  Now remember, the Fisker business model actually called for them to own a significant portion of the hybrid/electric car market in just the first couple of years of production.  They would have to beat to market shares of GM, Toyota (who owns the largest share with the Prius), Nissan and Honda to name a few.  Delaware's Caesar Rodney Institute highlighted the bold plan years ago:

Competition in the hybrid market is fierce. All the major automobile producers are moving into the hybrid market. By 2015 GM plans for 26 out of 33 models to be some form of hybrid. Chrysler plans to have 8 hybrid or electric vehicles by that year. The current U.S. hybrid market averages across the business cycle 25,000 cars per month (300,000 per year). Three quarters of the sales are Toyota's Prius or Lexus, with Prius accounting for 55% of the total hybrid market. Ford and Mercury (Fusion, Milan) currently have a 9% market share, with Honda at 8% and GM at 5%. Sales have dipped during the recession and are directly influenced by the price of gas.

 

Will the market support Fisker's 2014 sales projection? U.S. car sales should top 8 million by 2014. If the hybrids share of cars rises from its current 1% and climbs to 5%, hybrid sales in 2014 will be around 400,000. This means that Fisker, with a limited retail and service network and no established reputation, will capture 19% to 25% of the U.S. hybrid market. Should 50% of Fisker's cars be sold as exports, the highest proportion of exports for any current American company, Fisker is assuming a U.S. hybrid market share of 9% to 13%, greater than the current shares of Honda and GM.

 

The likelihood of such a plan working was also a subject of the Institute and it found that the plan left far more questions on the table than it answered.  Fisker has had to hike the prices of the Karma to keep the company afloat, pushed back production and start-up plans, has sought more taxpayer funding and still has only delivered a relative handful of vehicles.  It's certainly not competitive in the market with companies like Toyota, Honda and Nissan.  Which bring us now to the news of today which is also a blow to sales of the start-up car makers most expensive model.  It turns out that the battery packs inside the Fisker Karma's can catch fire (much like the Chevy Volt which was recalled earlier this year) and cause explosions.  Battery fires have plagued the electric car industry largely due to government's force behind the implementation of the unproven and untested technology to save face in its quest for green energy goals.  The bottom line is, do we want to pin our hopes to another Pinto or Yugo?  Fisker is already north of $600 million in government subsidies, some have said it's closing in on $1 billion and now with these setbacks, business will suffer.  There can be no doubt that the $50,000 Nina, which is planned to be built in Delaware will suffer from these setbacks if it comes online in 2013 as promised and many good folks, like the people at Union Park and the many contractors who embraced this green energy plan will be affected by these pains.  The fact is that electric cars aren't ready for prime time and no amount of government force will make it so.  In fact, I say, when the private market venture capitalists start investing THAT is when you will see the rise of the electric car.  

Government picks for winners and losers, Solyndra, Blue Water Wind and Fisker are proving what conservatives have been saying for a long time, that private markets should be dictating the products in the market place.  Government wastes untold billions of dollars every year that could be used to pay down or deficit on misguided attempts to solve every problem when the reality is that it just can't do it.  Government solutions rely on mandates, cash subsidies and risky gambles with other people's money that more often than not lead to disaster.  Look at the latest deal with Bloom energy.  Delmarva Power ratepayers are now venture capitalists (don't get excited, you get no return on this investment) in a company that markets unproven emergency backups to major corporations.  Better still, not only did the government have to force Delmarva Ratepayers to subsidize Bloom but it also forced subsequent governments to have to stick with the plan.  That's right, future General Assemblies MUST remain in the agreement with Bloom for 21 years.  TWENTY ONE YEARS!  No matter how much it costs, how effective it is or how many jobs it produces.  Further, they had to compromise their own leftist principles to do it!  In 2011, the General Assembly passed a bill that redefined the term "Renewable Energy" to include Natural Gas (a fossil fuel considered dirty by the left) because the Bloom boxes need natural gas to operate and because anything not classified as renewable under Delaware's Renewable Energy Portfolio costs Delmarva more money to use.  UNREAL!  We've got to stop this madness.  We need someone with an ounce of common sense to make some changes.

Delaware ranks 6th worst in employment since 2006

According to The Business Journals, Delaware lost anet total of more than 28,500 (21st in total jobs lost/gained) jobs from 2006 to 2011.   That’s a net downturn of 6.5% and ranks Delaware 45^th (out of 51 including D.C.) in the nation.  That puts Delaware behind states like New York, New Jersey and California whose economic woes have been made quite plain and it puts them just ahead of states like Michigan, Arizona and Florida who have often been highlighted as the poster states for a recessionary America.  This is despite a “pro-business” governor in Jack Markell whose policies have clearly hurt Delaware.  Despite suggestions to the contrary, Delaware has failed under Jack Markell’s leadership, to create jobs and expand economic opportunities.  Our government has tried every trick and scheme in the book to create a green jobs focused economy and even those attempts, which cost Delaware taxpayers millions of dollars have failed.  Recently, Blue Water Wind, who won government subsidies in excess of $800 million went under and took with it untold millions in wasted taxpayer dollars.  Before that, Fisker announced that it would begin making its cars in Finland, not in Wilmington.  That’s despite more than $650 million in state and federal aid plus a sweet discount deal on the former GM plant at Boxwood Rd.  The fact is that Jack Markell and his economic team have simply failed to create any jobs since his election in 2008 because he’s continued the same failed economic policies of Ruth Ann Minner.  In fact, since Markell came to us FROM the Minner Administration, it’s pretty clear that we’ve basically reelected Minner to a 3^rd term at least as far as the economic policies go.  It’s time we got serious about putting Delawareans back to work.

We’ve got to cut taxes on businesses and ease their cost of doing business, reduce regulations to encourage hiring and expansion and target incentives at companies that focus their economic attentions on Delaware.  The fact is that businesses are leaving Delaware for Florida, Arizona and other states who have made their business laws and taxes more attractive.  We MUST win them back to Delaware.  We can cut the gross receipts tax (which taxes each transaction at each level, effectively compounding the tax burden on an item 3 or 4 times before it reaches the customer) by 8%, reduce the corporate tax rate to 5% and match it with the best Chancery Court in the nation to regain our status as America’s business capital.  This will not only bring back corporate business like banks and credit cards but also blue collar manufacturing jobs which are SORELY needed in places like Wilmington where the real unemployment rate is nearing 20%.  We need to repeal the RGGI and RPS to reduce the electric premium on blue collar job creators.  The fact is that Delaware already far exceeds the RGGI standards and the regional cap and trade scheme only succeeds in stealing tens of millions of dollars from Delaware rate payers.  Meanwhile, renewable portfolio standards only drive up the cost of energy for both individuals and businesses by demanding that they pay more for their electricity than they need to for less efficient and less reliable energy.  Next, we must opt Delaware out of Obamacare by asserting our 10^th Amendment rights and joining the 28 states who are suing over the nationalized healthcare bill’s overreach of authority.  Exempting Delaware businesses and residents from the enormous costs of Obamacare and opening up the state to more competition in the insurance market will create tens of thousands of jobs and get Delaware back on the road to economic recovery.  Finally, it’s time we started investing in businesses that invest in Delaware.  We’ve got to target subsidies at companies that rebuild existing structures, hire Delawareans and invest in the communities where they do business.  No more open ended blank checks for blanket job creation that employ as many (if not more) out of state workers as they do in-state workers.

If we do these things, we can grow Delaware out of the recession and become a leader in the American emergence.  If we fail to do these things, Delaware is doomed to be at the bottom of the pack and stuck in a long term recession.  I think Delaware can lead.  I think Delaware can be a job creator, an innovator and a  leader but we’ve got to act right away. 

Christine O'Donnell Comes Full Circle

Full disclosure on a couple of things here:

1. I did in fact endorse and work for Christine O'Donnell in 2010.  I thought she was the best available candidate for the job and she stood for the alternative to the establishment good old boys network that has sold our country down the river.
2. I will support the eventual Republican nominee in the General Election because any of the available GOP candidates are far better than President Obama and will undo many of his most dangerous and harmful policies.

With those things said, let me say that this move by O'Donnell is not a surprise.  Months ago she all but endorsed Romney with campaign donations and made it quite clear that Romney was her guy.  Many of us told her that this was a bad move.  Christine rallied the grassroots, the anti-establishment, the rank and file conservatives who believe that the system is corrupted by the establishment elites who have much of the money.  It was her willingness to challenge the establishment and their figurehead, Mike Castle, that drove many new voters to the polls with hope for a change in the system.  I must admit, I'm disappointed in this move to endorse Romney.  I watched her interview with Sean Hannity where she made a lukewarm case for how the "TEA Party" has a misplaced dislike of Uncle Mitt (yes, he really is a distant uncle of mine).  She claimed (as did Ann Coulter before her...you might remember Ann Coulter as the one who said in February of 2011 that if Mitt Romney were the nominee, the GOP would lose) that Romney was clearly the most conservative candidate.  So let's take a look at Romney's conservatism:

He's also a global warming believer...

Romney Care...

Pro-Choice in Mass...but Pro-Life in Iowa?

The Romney RINO scorecard...
“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.” – Ann Romney, the wife of Mitt Romney 

Ronald Reagan said:

“We don’t intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldn’t make any sense at all.”
“A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency or simply to swell its numbers. “Let our banner proclaim… and if there are those who cannot subscribe to these [conservative] principles, then let them go their own way.”
Don’t give up your ideals, don’t compromise, don’t turn to expediency — and don’t, for heaven’s sake, having seen the inner workings of the watch — don’t get cynical.”

Ms. O'Donnell (and Ms. Coulter for that matter), I would submit to you that calling Romney "the most conservative candidate" and lecturing the TEA Party groups who have bought your books, supported your campaigns and listened to your viewpoints, is...well poor form (I'm sure you can come up with your own analogy here).  Do not insult our intelligence by trying to claim conservative credentials that don't exist.  And further more, Ms. O'Donnell, as someone who shed more blood, sweat and tears for you in 2010 than almost anyone else, how DARE you trade on the influence and political star power that your supporters bought you with their diligence and hard work?  How DARE you insult our intelligence by pretending like we haven't looked at the mans record.  We looked at yours and we looked at Mike Castle's record.  WE displayed them both prominently and WE overlooked the silly things you said as a young woman because they were silly.  We highlighted the offenses Castle committed because they were offensive.  This endorsement is of course your own business but where you upset us was when you lectured the TEA Party groups who have pushed back at this announcement (which let's face it, was as transparent as glass long ago).

I submit that this move will only serve to portray you in the following light:
That you have now sold out to the same establishment forces (Mitt Romney, Karl Rove) who you spent all of 2010 fighting against when you defeated Mike Castle.  It took 1 year for you to go from the People's champion (despite losing the General Election) to the Establishment whipping post.

At this point, I'm not knocking you for your endorsement (again, if Uncle Mitt is the nominee, and he likely will be, I would support him against Obama) but for your lecturing of the very folks who made your run the sensation that it was...the TEA Party.   Shame...shame...shame.

 

NRG is OUTTTTTTTA HEEEEEERRREEE

The News Journal has a new piece out today about NRG Energy's plans to drop the Bluewater wind power-purchase contract with Delmarva Power at the end of the year.  It turns out that the project simply cannot move forward without massive help from the Federal government (not a surprise to many of us who have been upset about this contract from the beginning).  As the news Journal reports:

The contract is widely seen as Bluewater's most valuable asset, and observers said it would be difficult to build the project without one.

NRG has struggled to secure financing for the massive project and failed to secure federal loan guarantee

Since the first plans hit the table, critics have questioned whether or not the massive wind farm off the Delaware coast would ever even get off the ground, much less live up to its lofty expectations.  Back in 2010, Resolute Determination contributor Steve Larrimore highlighted the bits of truth that began to trickle out that the Bluewater Wind project wasn't all it was cracked up to be.

“Deepwater consultant David Nickerson further explained that the Delaware price was arrived at partly through some regulatory sleight of hand. The lower price, he said, was reached by offsetting costs with potential revenue coming from renewable energy credits that accompany renewable projects. The value attached to those credits was allowed to be inflated in Delaware, Nickerson suggested, providing the illusion of “an extra revenue stream,” which artificially brought down the apparent cost of the project.” (I did the highlighting)

Whoops, guess he didn't think back in 2010, that we Delaware folk would get information from a Rhode Island newspaper...and he's supposed to be the genius behind a new energy source?  The predictions didn't start or end there, the Caesar Rodney Institute has been hard on Bluewater Wind from day one and have been a leader in pointing out the flaws in their model.  Back in Feb. of this year on the CRI blog, the Bluewater Wind model was highlighted by David Stevenson.  Even then there were questions about whether the massive subsidies needed to sustain the new "green energy technology" would even get approved by the federal government.  In fact, it might surprise rate payers to know that Delmarva Power was forced to sign an agreement to pay premium prices for energy (That would cost consumers between $90 and $220 million per year) that wouldn't even get started until 2016 (and now probably never).  What will really infuriate people is that NRG Bluewater Wind cost the taxpayers $800 million and will produce absolutely no power for that price.

But this isn't just about a bad business model of failed green energy plans, it's about cronyism of the highest order.  There is no market for green energy with prices that are more than 8 times as much as conventional sources.  Not only were Delaware General Assembly members like Senator Anthony DeLuca and Representative John Kowalko in the tank for this debacle in waiting, but even Congressman John Carney (Then Lt. Governor) was caught up in what will now become a scandalous account of government cronyism.

Carney, amid his 2008 campaign for governor, said in a release then that the offshore wind developer pledged to him to “make Delaware its regional hub for offshore wind development and maintenance.”

How's that hub working out for us now Congressman?  I mean politicians will say just about ANYTHING to win a race.  Experts cited in the News Journal piece today admit that without government forcing power companies to buy power at much higher rates from offshore wind, there's no way that the ocean based windmills could work!

Offshore wind power is among the more expensive forms of renewable energy.

"If your project doesn't have a PPA, a lot of the value is gone. And I'm sure they know that," Grace said of the power purchase agreement.

So there we have it folks, Delmarva, the PSC, the General Assembly, the Markell/Minner Administrations and Bluewater Wind all knew that the value of the energy source was gone if Delmarva didn't pay more (and charge you more).  Wrapping up the column, Aaron Nathans points out that Bluewater Wind is all but gone and so is our $800 million:

The six employees of Bluewater, including Mandelstam, would see their positions eliminated in January unless a buyer comes forward, Mandelstam said. NRG would retain the Bluewater brand.

NRG plans to suspend its offshore wind operations in New Jersey as well, Gaier said.
Despite the move, Mandelstam spoke highly of NRG on Monday, praising its commitment to solar energy.

It's likely that Congress will extend the wind tax credits, but "you can't take that to the bank," which Mandelstam said gave NRG pause.

The market for offshore wind has matured in Europe, but in the United States, "it's just one of those situations where policy really does affect the way business people allocate their money," Mandelstam said.

So folks, I have to ask you, given what has happened here with Bluewater Wind's collapse and the revelations that Fisker is finding it too costly and difficult to build their electric cars here in America, Do you trust them with Bloom? Further, do think that these folks really deserve to continue to represent you?  Finally, do you think that the PSC, which is "supposed" to be doing things "in your best interest" really ought to be making decisions in the background?  Why don't you call them?

Senator DeLuca has a FIOIA problem

Senator Anthony DeLuca seems to have a problem with FOIA requests. Namely, he doesn’t feel like they apply to him. The embattled Senator has escaped prosecution under the HATCH Act for his roles as both an administrator in the Office of Labor Law Enforcement and as State Senator and been challenged for his leadership position by his own party for his ethics and transparency problems. Earlier this year, Senator DeLuca refused to give an account of the time he spent working each of these taxpayer funded jobs. Despite pressure from the News Journal and other journalists, to turn over his timecard records and show that there was no overlap between his work in the executive branch and his work in the legislative branch, DeLuca carried on holding back his timecards for more than six months. When he finally did release them, the records indicated no conflict (of course) but the fact that he allowed the Attorney General’s office to make the case that the release of his time records were a matter of national security is evidence that he simply doesn’t respect the offices he holds. As an elected official who holds a job in both the legislative branch and the executive branch, it’s his duty to disclose to the public when he discharges his duties in each arena. Today, the News Journal is reporting that Senator DeLuca’s office is once again in violation of FOIA compliance and this time he’s not being protected by the Attorney General’s office. His office has once again refused to show the taxpayers of Delaware the records of his department’s work investigating the labor practices of Delaware businesses. For some reason, Senator DeLuca believes that he lives above the law. Maybe it’s the fact that in the 12 years that he has been in office, he has never faced an opponent, maybe it’s that he’s survived leadership challenges in the State Senate or maybe it’s just a complex that he has now that he’s spent more than a decade in the legislature but whatever the case, it’s about time we went ahead and shattered this worldview that he doesn’t need to be accountable to the people who elected him or to the people who entrust him with the ability to govern them.

Delaware voters,
Though you and I may not agree on everything, I think we can all agree on one thing, it’s time for Senator DeLuca to be replaced. He doesn’t feel like the rules apply to him. Whether it’s spending money for extra security doors for his office (as if that REALLY had something to do with his “safety”), failing to comply with the initial FOIA request for his timecards and ACTUALLY ALLOWING the AG to make a ridiculous claim that it would be a national security risk for us to know if there was any overlap in his work with the executive and legislative branches or this latest refusal to comply with FOIA and ethics laws, it’s clear that Senator DeLuca just doesn’t get it. We need a cleaner government with people who value the rules of the system and who genuinely WANT the people to see what goes on in Dover. I’m that person. I will do everything in the open and with complete transparency. I’ll tear the security door down myself, comply with FOIA requests BEFORE the deadlines and make sure that you all know what I’m doing before you even HAVE to ask. Also, I can promise you this, should I be fortunate enough to win, I would only seek two terms. That’s it, just two terms. No dynasty here, won’t have enough time to earn a pension, won’t need lifetime medical benefits or any of the other legislative retiree perks. Save that and give it to the folks who need it. I just want to go to Dover and shed some light and spread some truth. I’m even willing to put this pledge in writing. We have absolutely GOT to change the way business is done in Dover if we’re EVER going to achieve our shared goals of prosperity, transparency and openness.

Sincerely,
Evan Queitsch
Candidate 11th Senate District - http://www.evanqforde.com/

Thanksgiving

Thanksgiving means something special to me this year.  I've recently completed a genealogy of part of my family tree that as it turns out, harkens back to some of the first folks to come to America, the Pilgrims.  It was not only news to me but news to some member of my family as well.  It turns out that my 10th Great Grandfather, Edward Bompasse was born in England in 1605 and sailed to America on the Good Ship Fortune in 1622.  The Mayflower is of course the ship that we all think about when we think about the Pilgrims.  The Pilgrims of course, were separatists from the Church of England who were persecuted for their attempts to change the church (like asking for English translations of the Bible which was still read in Latin at the time) who fled first to Holland and then across the Atlantic to "The New World".The first colonists to land in Massachusetts came over on the Mayflower which embarked from England in 1620 and landed at Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1621. 103 passengers set out on the Mayflower but only half of them made it through the first winter at Plymouth.  Along the way, they signed "The Mayflower Compact" which declared certain necessary laws and government offices:

THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT

In the name of God, Amen. We whose names are under-written, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign Lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, etc.
Having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian faith, and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the eleventh of November [New Style, November 21], in the year of the reign of our sovereign lord, King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Dom. 1620.

In 1621, the Pilgrims planted their crops in the spring and harvested them in the fall.  Once the harvest was brought in, they had a feast intended to thank God for the bounty they'd received and for the Providence bestowed on them with regards to the Indians.  Below are the only two primary sources of the story of the first Thanksgiving:

Edward Winslow, Mourt's Relation :

(In modern day spelling)
"our harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowling, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together, after we had gathered the fruits of our labors; they four in one day killed as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the Company almost a week, at which time amongst other Recreations, we exercised our Arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and amongst the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went out and killed five Deer, which they brought to the Plantation and bestowed on our Governor, and upon the Captain and others.  And although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us, yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want,  that we often wish you partakers of our plenty."William Bradford, Of Plimoth Plantation :

In modern spelling
"They began now to gather in the small harvest they had, and to fit up their houses and dwellings against winter, being all well recovered in health and strength and had all things in good plenty.  For as some were thus employed in affairs abroad, others were exercised in fishing, about cod and bass and other fish, of which they took good store, of which every family had their portion. All the summer there was no want; and now began to come in store of fowl, as winter approached, of which this place did abound when they came first (but afterward decreased by degrees).  And besides waterfowl there was great store of wild turkeys, of which they took many, besides venison, etc. Besides, they had about a peck of meal a week to a person, or now since harvest, Indian corn to that proportion.  Which made many afterwards write so largely of their plenty here to their friends in England, which were not feigned but true reports."

The stories both talk about the struggles that the Pilgrims faced in that first year. Reading more of the stories that these excerpts are taken from, you will learn that the Pilgrims dug graves for their friends and families upon their first arrival in America.  They buried their friends and family who'd died on the long journey from England across the Atlantic Ocean and set to surviving while the Mayflower returned to England with news of the landing and the loss of life.  The Pilgrims had limited supplies, had to build their homes from scratch and only a limited defense force to deploy against wild animals or Indian attackers.  The first harvest would determine the survival of the colony as Bradford writes in "Of Plymouth Plantation":

"They also found two of the Indian's houses covered with mats, and some of their implements in them; but the people had run away and could not be seen. They also found more corn, and beans of various colours. These they brought away, intending to give them full satisfaction (repayment) when they should meet with any of them, - as about six months afterwards they did.

"And it is to be noted as a special providence of God, and a great mercy to this poor people, that they thus got seed to plant corn the next year, or they might have starved; for they had none, nor any likelihood of getting any, till too late for the planting season."

Monument to the settlers of Marshfield
including Edward Bompasse

The first Thanksgiving was a feast intended to thank God for His Providence and also to celebrate the good that God had done for the Pilgrims.  It was also a prayer for future good to befall them and God delivered on his promise to protect them.  Days after the first Thanksgiving celebration, The Good Ship Fortune landed at Plymouth with the second wave of settlers including the necessary Tradesmen, families and the rest of the original settlers.  Among them was Edward Bompasse, my ancestor, who was among the original separatists and who was a farmer and land owner in America.  This refreshment of people and supplies ensured that the colony would not only survive but thrive and it's hard to imagine this taking place without the finger of God in support of the cause of the Pilgrims.  So when you give thanks today, remember to give thanks for God's providence in 1621.

Fracking the Delaware River Basin

Listeners to Delaware's most popular local talk radio show, the Rick Jensen Show on WDEL (weekdays 1pm-4pm) recently heard Democratic Representative John Kowalko (Newark) go on a rant about fracking in the Delaware River Basin in which he insinuated some things that are, to be frank, simply untrue.  Before we get to Rep. Kowalko's comments, let me give you a little history on what we're talking about.  After the successful and uneventful fracking of the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania, energy companies have turned their attention to the rest of the 500 Trillion cubic ft of natural gas that is stewing among the rest of the shale.  Some of that oil lies in the northern end of the Delaware River Basin in Northeastern Pennsylvania and Southeastern New York.  Those plans could potentially affect not only N.Y. and PA but also NJ and Delaware.  So the issue of fracking was brought before the Delaware River Basin Commission which is a panel of the Governors from each of the Delaware River Basin states and the lead engineer of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers that meets to determine the potential impact vs. the potential benefits of any policy that affects the Delaware River Basin.  Once these companies began to look into the DRB and the DRBC began meeting about it, the environmentalists began their assault on fracking.

What is fracking?

Fracking refers to a method used to extract oil or natural gas from a well in which a substance called "fracking fluid" is pumped into the pipe and ultimately into the shale rock to stimulate oil and natural gas wells inside the shale.  During the practice, piping is encased in cement and drilled 6,000 feet into the ground.  The cement casing is in place to protect groundwater and to contain the fracking fluid.  The fracking fluid is composed of the following materials:
90%  Water
9.5% Sand
.5% Chemicals as follows - Sodium Chloride (used in table salt), Ethelyne Glycol (used in Windex), Borate salts (used in lipstick), Sodium Carbonate (used in detergents), Guar Gum (used to make Ice Cream) and Isopropanol (used in deodorant)

Environmentalist scare tactics often point out that more than a half dozen deadly chemicals are used in fracking and pumped directly into the groundwater.  In fact, this is the first of the outright untruths that Kowalko mentioned.  The reality is that unless salt, ice cream and water are deadly, the number is 3 chemicals (+ sand) and the fluid is pumped into the shale thousands of feet below the water table.  In fact, despite the propaganda in the film "Gasland", in all the fracking operations in Pennsylvania, there has been no proven affect to groundwater. 

Another favorite of the environmentalist scare mongers is that fracking causes earthquakes.  This is another absurdity that Kowalko was peddling on the Jensen show.  Earthquakes are caused by the sliding of tectonic plates.  Now, there is some debate over what causes the plates to move but the majority of scientists believe that the movement is related to the earths gravity, and the rotation of the Earth.  What's clear, is that explosions on the surface of the earth, or even thousands of feet below the surface do NOT cause earthquakes.  In fact, the USGS among other agencies around the world have experimented with detonating nuclear weapons below the surface of the Earth and they have found that even a 5 megaton nuke (5 times the size of the largest active weapon in the U.S. arsenal), detonated 5,000 ft below the surface couldn't cause an earthquake.

My Take

As a candidate for the Delaware State Senate, I believe that I should make my opinions known on the issue.  Given the factual evidence of the benefits and risks involved in fracking the ground in the Delaware River Basin, if asked, I would strongly consider the idea.  Should hard factual evidence of groundwater contamination or real danger to the water table be brought to my attention, I could consider a different position but given the current reality, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't look at safe ways to increase our domestic supply of many different sources of energy.

The simple truth is that the best, cheapest and most effective way to not only reduce our reliance on foreign oil but to boost our economy is to develop a sound energy strategy.  For all the talk about the outrageous "subsidies" for oil and natural gas, renewable sources take far more for far less output.  Renewable energy accounts for just 8% of all sources of energy in the United States and even the most optimistic outlooks only expect it to account for a maximum of 12% of U.S. demand in coming years.  Invest more money to grow them?  According to the U.S Energy Information Agency, in Fiscal Year 2010, Wind got $5 Billion in direct subsidies while oil and natural gas received $654 Million in tax write-offs.  Solar, received 33% MORE than wind energy did.  Let me just address the issue of subsidy type here, we're talking about direct subsidies vs. tax incentives.  Direct subsidies are cash payments to producers to make their product cheaper than it would normally be.  This can be done through loans or grants (the more common form) and is a way that government selects the companies and industries it wants to make profitable regardless of their market value.  Tax incentives are generally available to most businesses/individuals and in the case of the oil and gas companies they come in the form of write-offs for land depreciation.  It's simple, the land is worth a certain amount with a certain amount of oil on it. As you remove that oil, from the ground, the land devalues.  it's only practical to then allow that land owner to write-off the excess taxes on land no longer worth the original value.  The argument that oil and natural gas have had their own time of direct subsidies is also not valid.  There is no history of any direct subsidies to oil and gas companies, even when the industry was just getting started in the late 1800's.  In fact, even the tax write-offs didn't start until 50 years AFTER the industry was born.  Meanwhile, renewable sources have needed direct subsidies just to remain afloat and as we've seen with Solyndra and Fisker, even that is hit or miss.

So in the end, we need to be smart as a nation and Delaware can ill afford even higher energy costs.  The Marcellus Shale and other shale formations give America a distinct advantage and a real opportunity at not only energy independence but also to reduce the cost of energy.  Lowering costs to businesses and consumers would create jobs, lower the burden on families and increase our safety and security.  The danger of soap, water and sand thousands of feet below the surface is minimal given the positive economic impact that would result from the fracking.

I'll give the final word to the EPA:

Occupy Wall Street Protestors Only Have Themselves to Blame

We’ve all seen the Occupy Wall Street protests on the news.  Whether it is the images of college aged children prancing through tent cities, marches with hundreds and thousands of protestors or even the riotous actions in places like Oakland, reactionto it has been mixed and has cut across party lines.  What began as a seemingly homogenous ball of anger has now begun to define itself.  Their demands are as mixed as their support though and it continues to feed the idea that they are a disorganized band of rebels.  That comes in part, from the MANY factions involved and in part from the fact that most of them are radical groups.  The images themselves lend us to wonder, where do we stand while the many different demands are perplexing as well.

But what it really all comes down to is this, these Occupy Wall Street folks are protesting the wrong thing.  They should be protesting…themselves.

Huh?  I know, stay with me here.

What is it the Occupy Wall Street crowd is consistently saying?  It’s all the fault of those greedy Wall Street bankers and the corrupt corporations right?  They’re consistent in saying that this banking crisis is due to Wall Street greed.  That the banking crisis we have today is because of Wall Street greed. 

So we’ve established that the problem, at least in their eyes, is greed mixed with corruption, right?  And what’s the leading cause of greed and corruption?  A lack of ethics and morality is the answer to that question.  Clearly, if Wall Street was ethically and morally grounded, there wouldn’t be deliberate over speculation intended to drive the price of products up, loans made without proof of income, residency or identification and you wouldn’t see mortgage backed securities packaged in those Credit Default Swaps.  You wouldn’t see these things, all labeled as the culprits of the fall of the market in 2008 because quite simply, they’re not ethical or moral.  You wouldn’t see Fannie and Freddie aligning with the Unions and ACORN to send thousands of protestors to stand on the lawns of bank CEO’s and managers chanting to make more risky loans and you wouldn’t see the bankers cutting a deal with Chris Dodd and Barney Frank to ensure their losses on these risky mortgage loans would be covered with taxpayer dollars.  And what, of all things, is the largest driving factor of positive morals and ethics?  The answer is clear again, religion and faith.  You can argue about individuals here and there buy by and large, of the hundreds of millions of Americans who believe in God and who truly live that lifestyle out, you will see morals and ethics prevail.  And who are the leaders in the fight to get rid of faith and push God out of the way?  The same people at Occupy Wall Street...

So these same people who have destroyed morality and ethics in America by attacking faith and trying to destroy God, are now protesting the fruits of their own labors!  You’d think they would be happy with these results since they were the only possible result of their battle against God.  You would think that the folks protesting this greed and corruption would be those who have been fighting FOR faith and FOR God but instead, those people, many of whom found themselves at home in the TEA Party where morals and ethics are at the forefront, have largely come out AGAINST the movement whose means are over the top and misdirected at best or mean-spirited and evil at worst.  These people, who created a culture of corruption, are now upset at the corruption.  Hard to wrap your head around it until you realize that…creating the crisis was the whole point to begin with. 

Yanno, like tear down capitalism, the American Republican and our financial system and replace it with One World Socialism.

Herman Cain's 9-9-9 Plan Explained

It's no secret that I am a big supporter of Herman Cain.  If someone were to ask who I was endorsing, I would say Mr. Cain and there are a number of reasons for that.  I think he is the most qualified candidate in the room to fix the economy, get us out of debt and lead us in the right direction.  Fellow blogger Ted Belman over at Israpundit lays out Cain's impressive resume of accomplishments.  To put it simply, he has the educational pedigree of Obama (a Masters in Comp. Sci), better business experience than Romney, the family background of Santorum, the TEA Party fire of Bachmann and dare I say it the gall to say what he means that Ron Paul has!  What he DOESN'T have, are the chains of a lifetime of politics dragging him down.  He doesn't have the baggage of  being a politician.  He's been a citizen, a problem solver, a military man and yes, he's been a rocket scientist!  So while it doesn't take a rocket scientist to solve our problems, I'd feel better having someone who is one working on the solutions!

With that said, Cain's often attacked over his controversial 9-9-9 plan by people who either don't understand it or are misrepresenting it for political gain.  While I don't have the credentials to pretend I know everything, this plan is one that I feel comfortable speaking about because it's just that simple.  For many years now, our government has increasingly tried to make things more complicated than they are in an effort to get us to turn away and "leave it to them to deal with".  The fact is that it's really NOT that complicated.  The economy of the nation is no different than the economy at home.  They've over time convinced us that deficit spending is OK, that we don't need to even have a budget and that our nations credit would never be questioned.  Well that wall of straw came crashing down when America lost her AAA rating with S&P.  While the politicians will demonize S&P for their downgrade, the real fault lies with those politicians who have run up $18 Trillion in debt, treated our Constitution like a wet rag and played fast and loose with the rules.  Cain's plan is not a political plan, but a practical business solution to the problem.  He started by identifying the problem, which we will do below.

In our homes, if the bills come up off and we owe more than we take in, maybe we get away with that for a month or two but eventually the bills come due.  It's no different for government, no matter what they say, the rules of physics, mathematics and accounting are the same.  At home, when you see debt you look for ways to pay it off, either you cut down on spending to even it out or you have to find a way to make more money, either with a second job, a raise or some other increase in "revenue".  For government, "revenue" (what we call "income" at home) is taxes and fees that citizens are charged to ensure that the bills are met.  Government has to take in enough to provide a benefit to the people and cover the cost of the projects.  What's happened over time is that as government has convinced us that deficit spending (a.k.a. running up credit card debt) is OK, we've added another cost to the list, interest.  So now, government has to spend enough to provide a benefit, cover costs AND pay interest on the debt.  Their answer?  Borrow more money.  It's like at home, instead of cutting back on spending or picking up that part time job, you went out and got another credit card with a higher limit.  When it gets really bad, they authorize the Fed to print more money (which we would go to prison for) which really is just borrowing from one hand to pay another, a little like using your rent payment to pay your electric bill.  The rent will still come due, you've just kicked the can down the road except when you print MORE money, you decrease the value of it and so you need more of it to pay your bills.  Fast forward a little and what you have is the equivalent of the government maxing out credit cards at all of the nations banks, the major international banks, local credit unions and now looking for even MORE.  If it sounds insane, it is.  This is what the government has done behind our backs and NOW, when their scheme is finally exposed, they look at the banks (credit card lenders) and say "Why did you give us all this MONEY!?" or they look at big business (which eventually becomes small businesses) and say "HEY!  You're stealing from us because you have money and we need money!"(like demanding a raise from your boss because you're overspending at home).  One day they will look at all of us as taxpayers and demand a raise.  So we know the problem, spending, debt and an inability to make the tough choice due to moral and ethical bankruptcy.  Why is 9-9-9 such a great solution?

The genius is in the simplicity.  The current tax code is more than 60,000 pages of loopholes, legalese and special interest giveaways that confuse, confound and distract from the fact that there are a dozen major federal taxes not to mention the fees charged to people and businesses as a result of our regulatory climate. Cain's plan doesn't tinker around the edges of the code, delete a few loopholes or monkey around with the language.  It throws the old system out (and good riddance!) and replaces it with 3 simple taxes for us to follow.  No more chasing the other hand and looking for the many hands.  It's divided up into 3 parts, a corporate tax of 9% which lowers our current corporate tax from the highest in the world at 35% down to one of the lowest in the world and which will stimulate growth (more on this tax later); an income tax of 9% (currently those making between $0 and $8,500 are taxed at 10% so EVEN those Americans get a tax cut); and finally a 9% national sales tax (this seems to give people the most heartburn but as I'll explain, this is actually far closer to the principles of America's founding than the income tax is).  That's it folks, all other taxes go away, no Capital Gains taxes, dividend taxes, death taxes, payroll taxes, medicare taxes, social security taxes, zip,zilch NADA.  It's GONE!  And we are left with just 3 taxes to keep an eye on.  So let's look at those taxes and how they compare to the current system.

9% Corporate Tax
As I mentioned above, America's corporate tax rate is 35% which makes it the highest in the world.  This is a tax put on businesses of a certain size that basically allows them to do business in America.  It's also the main factor behind these corporations "shipping jobs overseas" (well this and regulations like Obamacare...but I digress) and putting Americans out of work.  So next time Barack Obama starts yapping about the evil corporations, ask him why the country taxes them so high as compared to the rest of the world and what he would do if he were running that business.  Another thing we know about corporate taxes is that they are "regressive" and passed along to consumers in the price of goods and services.  This is a word you'll hear Ron Paul supporters and the left use a lot to frighten the poor (we'll cover regressive taxes later when we talk about the national sales tax).  So we know that 35% corporate tax gets pushed through on the price of everything you buy, which means there is an automatic 35% markup in pretty much everything you buy.  Cain's plan slashes that tax rate from 35% down to 9% which will make it one of the worlds lowest rates and encourage businesses to return to America and employ American workers.  That will strengthen the economy, widen the tax base, put more people back to work and generally create MORE revenue and more prosperity.  It will also lower the cost of goods, no longer will there be a 35% markup on every product, it will be reduced to 9% which will make everything you buy cheaper and lower the threshold for poverty.  These are improvements we can all get behind.

9% National Sales Tax
Now let's talk about he boogieman in the room, the National Sales Tax.  As I said above, the far left AND the far right, the Obama supporters and the Ron Paul supporters are already running around calling this a "regressive tax".  Basically, a regressive tax is one that affects the poor more than the rich and it's usually used to discourage sales taxes.  The idea is that the poor spend a higher percentage of their income on necessities than the rich do.  Perhaps this is true on paper BUT in reality the rich spend far MORE in terms of dollars (and often percentage as well) on products than the poor do.  The rich buy bigger and more expensive houses, cars, boats, etc.  They often spend more on their clothes, eat more expensive food and require more (and higher costing) utilities than the poor.  With that said, keep in mind that the slashing of the corporate tax will also drive down the PRICE of goods and stretch American dollars that much farther.  Now, a national sales tax is a scary proposition, especially with a Congress like we have.  With that said, almost every state in the nation has a state sales tax and have since the beginning of the country so it can't be too bad for the poor or no one would live in a state with a sales tax!  The reality is that the corporate taxes DO get passed on but really a sales tax is fair, not regressive.  It allows each of us to contribute to our nation's future and with the boost to the economy that the corporate tax reduction would grant, the impact would be far less than it might be if say they were to institute it now with no other changes.    Given the savings of all the other taxes that are being dropped completely, this works out in almost every ones favor.  In fact, without loopholes, the only people who might be hurt by this are government and the corporations who rely on loopholes to dodge their tax burden today.


FAQ/Myths
1.) Isn't this just a tax increase? - The answer is no.  This is not a tax increase.  Let's do some simple calculations.  As we discussed, you pay a 35% tax on everything you buy today PLUS your income tax of at least 10% (I know that SOME people pay 0 tax but those are anomalies easily dealt with) so your total tax burden is a minimum of 45% of your total income and expenses.  Under Cain's plan, with the 9% sales tax, 9% income tax and 9% corporate tax, your total tax burden is just 27% which results in at least a net 18% cut for even the lowest paid Americans.
2.) Won't the politicians just increase the taxes from say 9-9-9 to 15-15-15 and drive our burden up? - The answer is maybe.  See, the reason our taxes are so high today is because we have allowed them to get out of control and take more and more and spend more and more without holding them accountable.  Our government is not designed to run on auto pilot.  We MUST be vigilant and while that requires work on our part, the upside is that WE have the power and control to get them OUT of office.  So theoretically, yes they could increase the taxes but with only three to look at, it would be hard to hide an increase and protections in Cain's plan make it harder.  #1 Since this is Cain's plan, he would be President and thus would have to sign any increases.  Veto anyone?  #2 It requires 2/3 majority in both houses to pass and as we've seen in 2011, you try herding these cats to do anything by 2/3rds majority!
3.) How will the poor be protected? - Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry all brought this up during the last CNN debate and quite honestly I think Cain missed an opportunity here.  He talked about the fact that there is no sales tax on used goods and since poor people buy more used goods than new goods (cars, houses, etc.) there is less opportunity for those folks to pay the sales tax.  He also talked about the Empowerment zones which will be areas in which his plan would focus to rebuild struggling communities.  I'm thinking about places like Detroit and other such places devastated throughout the years.  What he missed hitting on was the simplest face of all.  His plan will drive DOWN the price of goods DRAMATICALLY.  Think about this a second, the difference in the cost of an item under his plan in terms of the corporate tax is this, under the current system an item worth $100 ends up being marked up 35% ($35 for every $100) and the total cost to the consumer is $135.  Under Cain's plan, the markup drops to 9% making that same $100 item cost $109.  That's a savings of $16 in this example.  The results are even better in almost every case, when you factor in all of the current taxes vs. Cain's whole plan.
4.) Will this affect Social Security/Medicare revenues? - No, these revenues will be collected from the pool created by the 9-9-9 plan so the only difference will be that they are not going to be separate taxes.  Also, Herman would lock those funds back up and make sure Congress stops spending them on wars, roads and welfare. 
5.) How will this affect underground consumer markets? - It will bring underground markets back into the tax fold.  How?  Consider this, today, an illegal immigrant worker is paid under the table where they pay no taxes on the income.  They can then go to a state with no sales tax and buy a product off the shelf only paying the 35% markup meanwhile, you and I pay10% percent on income, then the additional 35% markup.  Under Cain's plan, the incentive for companies to hire illegal workers under the table is reduced and these illegal workers are then paying into the national tax system via the national sales tax.
6.) What about states who don't have a sales tax like New Hampshire and Delaware? - This is another question that came up in the debate that I think ALL of the other candidates are disingenuous about.  #1 - Cain is right when he says that comparing the national sales tax to the state tax is like comparing apples to oranges.  They are entirely different things and state taxes will ALWAYS exist.  They will exist with the current plan OR with a new plan and so there is no reason to count them.  With the national sales tax or without it, Delaware for instance, will not show a state sales tax on the receipt but Pennsylvania, Maryland and New Jersey all will.  The price of products will STILL be lower.  In fact, there is some talk about not itemizing the national sales tax on the receipt but that will be fleshed out as we go along.
7.) How come no one else has thought of this if it's such a good idea? -These are not necessarily brand new ideas but what Herman has that the others don't is a a lack of political fear.  He is not, as I said earlier, shackled to politics like the others.  He's a business man and a problem solver and he designs programs to solve problems.  9-9-9 is not a perfect end solution and Herman freely admits that he wants to transition to a Fair Tax system, eliminate the corporate and income taxes all together and get America's engine humming again.  This is a stepping stone that takes the best elements from the Flat Tax, the Fair Tax and corporate taxes  (if there are any) and rolls them together in a transitional ball.
8) Can this pass the Congress? - The answer is yes.  Such sweeping changes to the current system have met with opposition from both sides yes, but there is enough support on the right and among moderates that an election mandate would allow Cain's plan some traction.  That's not to say that he would force it through or that he would need a super-majority to pass it the way Obama did to pass his healthcare bill (but it wouldn't hurt to swing the balance of power to the GOP!) but rather that he would be able to present it.  Sure the plan will be argued, debated and potentially modified but the upside to that, with Herman Cain in the White House, if it doesn't make sense, he ain't signing it!  And, if we don't like it, we throw the bums out and move on!

I know this is long and so I won't take up anymore time.  If I haven't convinced you by now, I'm not sure what else I can do BUT if you have a question, drop a comment and I'll get back to you.
*Updates*
10/20/2011 - My good friend Charlie Copeland, who is widely considered one of the smartest guys in Delaware, looks at the 9-9-9 plan from the perspective of economic growth and the drop in prices as a result of the reduced costs on business.  http://resolutedetermination.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/9-9-9-if-taxes-are-higher-but-costs-are-lower-americans-are-happier/