The media has been hiding economic reports over the last few weeks. As we get closer to the midterms, they will be doing what they can to protect Democrats.

But Americans continue to suffer from inflation, high gas prices, and other stains on their wallets. And now, another sign has come out that the recession is already on us.

From Washington Examiner:

Housing starts measure the annualized change in the number of new residential buildings that began construction. Last month, they declined by a hefty 9.6% to a 1.45 million annualized rate after posting slight gains in June, according to a Tuesday report from the Commerce Department.

If the rising price of ground beef or unleaded regular didn’t tip you off that the economy isn’t great, this will.

The number of housing starts in July fell a steep 9.6%. This number measures how many new residential buildings begin construction.

Even a slight drop suggests a weakening economy. The housing market is always the first industry to suffer in a recession (or a depression).

When things are bad, people cut back on spending. The bigger expenses, like houses and cars, are cut first.

Then everything else quickly follows. These cutbacks force companies to make cuts themselves. In some cases, they lay off as many workers as possible.

So, this number is much more important than you might realize. New housing products dropped last month.

That’s consistent with other numbers that have come out recently. Inflation is hitting construction, as everything is costing more.

The housing bubble from 2020 long burst. Americans don’t want to risk moving or buying a new home, because it’s just too expensive.

The rest will come shortly, whether Biden believes it or not.

UPDATE: And just in, now housing sales just smashed through the floor. From CNBC:

Sales of previously owned homes fell nearly 6% in July compared with June, according to a monthly report from the National Association of Realtors.

Sales dropped about 20% from the same month a year ago.

“In terms of economic impact we are surely in a housing recession because builders are not building,” said Lawrence Yun, chief economist for the Realtors.

The fallout from Biden’s leadership just keeps piling up, folks.

SOURCE: The Patriot Journal

central pillar of the just-passed Inflation Reduction Act is $80 billion going to the IRS to hire some 87,000 new agents, doubling the current force, to chase down U.S. taxpayers who allegedly are not meeting their tax obligations.

The rationale is we have a large national budget deficit — that is, government is bringing in less money than it spends — so a larger army of IRS agents chasing down tax deadbeats will help solve our nation’s fiscal problems.

But part of this same new law in which U.S. taxpayers are asked to spend $80 billion to hire more IRS agents to shake down their neighbors who are supposedly not paying their fair share, there is $430 billion in new government spending, a large portion of which is earmarked for green energy projects of various shapes and forms.

At the same time that we’re expanding our army of tax collectors, we continue to expand government and spending at an even faster pace.

The Congressional Budget Office has just released its latest Long-Term Budget Outlook, and here we get a broader picture of the problem.

According to the report, “From 1972 to 2021, total federal outlays averaged 21% of GDP; over 2022-2052 period, such outlays are projected to average 26% of GDP.”

The Congressional Budget Office projects that government will take on average 5% more from our national economy in the next 30 years than it did on average over the last 50 years.

Looking at our GDP in 2022, roughly $25 trillion, at 26% of GDP, government spending will be over a trillion dollars more than it would have been at 21%.

A trillion dollars more in spending on average per year, with another 87,000 IRS agents running after taxpayers to make sure they pay up.

So, the bigger army of tax collectors is about helping raise money to finance ongoing expansion of government and increasing control of government over the lives of private Americans.

Why, as someone whose business is trying to improve the lives of low-income Americans, do I care about this?

Turning pages forward in the CBO report, we get to the really shocking information.

From 1992 to 2021, per CBO, the average growth of the U.S. economy was 2.4% per year. CBO projects that from 2022 to 2052 the average growth of the U.S. economy will be 1.7% per year.

This should shock every American, and it’s getting hardly any attention.

The more our national economy is controlled by government and politicians, the more sluggish will be growth of our economy.

It stands to reason. Growth comes from entrepreneurs, work, creativity. More government means less of all these things and slower growth.

Slower growth means lower income and less opportunity.

Anyone who cares about helping those who want to get ahead in America should be cheering for faster growth and less government rather than more government and slower growth.

Hoover Institution economist John Cochrane has pointed out that from 1950 to 2000, the U.S. economy grew at 3.5% per year. Real income per person went from $16,000 in 1950 to $50,000 in 2000. If the economy grew from 1950 to 2000 at 2% instead of 3.5%, notes Cochrane, income in 2000 would have risen to just $23,000 rather than $50,000.

It’s why, as someone who cares about helping low-income Americans get ahead and improve their lot, I care about a growing dynamic economy, not a bloated, sclerotic economy controlled by politicians and Washington special interests.

The so-called Inflation Reduction Act takes matters in the exact opposite direction in which we should be going. Pretending to care about the nation’s fiscal imbalances while adding $430 billion in new spending, all of it driven and defined by Washington special interests, is the problem, not the solution.

SOURCE: Right and Free

A Congressional Budget Office report found that the Internal Revenue Service will collect billions of dollars from auditing low- and middle-income Americans under the White House-backed “Inflation Reduction Act,” contradicting Biden administration claims, according to Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee.

Fox News confirmed the report, finding the CBO informed congressional Republicans that, under the act, audits of taxpayers making under $400,000 will account for about $20 billion in additional revenue.

The news comes after high-ranking Biden administration officials, including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, assured Americans that the IRS would not increase audits of people earning under $400,000. The Inflation Reduction Act, which on Sunday passed the Senate, allows the IRS to hire up to 87,000 new agents, making it larger than the Pentagon, the State Department, the FBI, and the Border Control combined. Democrats shut down an amendment that would have prevented agents from increasing audits on middle- and low-income Americans.

The bill is expected to pass the House on Friday.

News of the CBO report also comes as the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business found the bill will have an “impact on inflation [that] is statistically indistinguishable from zero” even as it raises taxes on Americans and decreases GDP for the next decade.

Republican lawmakers have pushed back against the bill, with Sen. Tom Cotton (Ark.) saying that “only the Democrats would call a bill that doubles the size of the IRS, raises taxes, and spends billions on a green energy slush fund the ‘Inflation Reduction Act.'”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

China and Russia are the clear winners of the the carbon-reducing provisions in the Democrats’ latest spending bill that aim to cut fossil fuel emissions by 40 percent by 2030, according to former President Donald Trump’s erstwhile economic adviser.

Stephen Moore, a Trump-era adviser and senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told NTD in a recent interview that the climate-related provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act—now en route to final House approval—would hamstring American energy production and benefit adversaries.

“The two big winners from this bill clearly are Russia and China,” Moore said, adding that he thinks the bill is not just bad for the U.S. economy but it’s “really bad for national security to give up our energy dominance.”

Moore pointed out that China—which is responsible for around five times more carbon emissions than the United States—is now building dozens of massive coal plants and “obviously, they don’t care about climate change.”

As a major exporter of fossil fuels, Russia also stands to gain from efforts to accelerate curbs on U.S. carbon emissions as that would keep crude prices elevated and bolster Russia’s revenue stream, Moore said.

The economist argued that the Biden administration has “basically declared a war on our fossil fuels,” while pointing to Germany’s “experiment” of going all-in on clean energy a decade or so ago that he said “basically led to a complete economic collapse.”

“Let’s not follow in their footsteps,” he said.

Markets or Government Subsidies?

The Inflation Reduction Act includes $369 billion in climate and energy provisions, with measures like tax credits for buying electric vehicles, making homes more energy efficient, and installing residential solar panels and battery systems.

The measure also reinstates the superfund tax on crude and imported oil, which could lead to higher energy bills for households, and it includes a fee of up to $1,500 per ton for methane emissions.

Overall, the bill is set to more than triple power production from wind, solar, and energy storage capacity installations, according to an analysis from the American Clean Power Association (ACP).

“More simply, it means that roughly 40 percent of the country’s electricity will come from wind, solar, and energy storage by 2030,” ACP said in the analysis, which projects that the Inflation Reduction Act will, overall, deliver an estimated 525 to 550 gigawatts of new non-fossil fuel power by the end of the decade, up from the current 211 gigawatts.

The bill is also expected to generate over $900 billion in economic activity via the construction of clean energy projects between now and 2030, according to the association.

Moore said that he doesn’t object to renewable sources of energy but argued that market forces rather than government subsidies should be their key driver.

“We didn’t have the government subsidize Henry Ford when he invented cars,” Moore said. “We didn’t have the the federal government subsidize Standard Oil when it started making … gas plentiful and cheap for everyone. So why do we need to have the government throw hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in this industry?”

Moore also argued that, contrary to what its name implies, the bill won’t reduce inflation.

Inflation Reduction?

The Inflation Reduction Act “will increase inflation,” Moore said, adding that, “the reason we have 9 percent inflation today is because of the massive Biden spending spree.”

“There’s two things you don’t want to do when you have massive inflation. You don’t want to spend more government money. And when you’re in a recession, you don’t want to raise taxes. This bill makes both those mistakes,” he said.

Some disagree with Moore about the bill’s impact on inflation.

Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said in an Aug. 9 interview in The Harvard Gazette that “the tendency of this bill will be to reduce inflation because over time it reduces demand by bringing down budget deficits.”

Summers also argued that it would bolster the supply of key commodities in the energy sector, helping push down prices.

Other backers of the bill, like Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), say the government subsidies for clean energy will have a knock-on effect and boost private investment in the sector and so accelerate cutting carbon emissions.

“This is going to be more massive than people realize,” Khanna told Politico in a recent interview.

“If the government invests $300 billion in solar, wind, batteries, and heat pumps, that has the potential to unlock trillions of dollars in private sector investment in climate,” he added.

Moore argued that the bill is less about the environment and more about money.

“This is a massive, now trillion-dollar, industry. This is about money, folks, this doesn’t have anything to do about cleaning up the environment or keeping our environment safe,” he said.

“This is massive numbers of huge companies and huge investors. They’re going to get very, very rich off of these hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars of subsidies,” Moore added.

The American Petroleum Institute (API), a fossil fuels industry group, identified six problematic provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act that it argued would undermine the industry’s ability to promote energy security for American consumers.

Besides the superfund tax and methane emission fees, the API also noted additional costs imposed on energy companies with the bill’s minimum book tax provisions and increased rental fees on onshore leases.

The group also panned the bill’s omitting of comprehensive permitting reform, which API believes is key for bolstering domestic energy production, lowering costs for consumers, and helping the country meet its emission objectives.

“Glaringly absent in the bill is permitting reform, which is required for America’s infrastructure needs and to bolster critical oil, natural gas, and renewable supplies to meet our current and future energy demand,” said Mike Sommers, API president and CEO, in a statement.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Cryin’ Brian Schatz

A Democratic senator was overcome with emotion on Sunday as the Senate prepared to pass legislation that would dramatically expand the IRS and permanently solve so-called climate change, the Washington Post reports:

Even before the vote was final, Democratic lawmakers on the chamber floor rejoiced and cheered, shaking hands and hugging, as their Republican counterparts cast their votes and headed for the exits for a month-long summer break. Manchin made a beeline for Schumer’s desk, as the two men leaned their heads together and clasped their hands. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), a proponent of climate change provisions, broke into tears.

Schatz praised the passage of what some are calling the “IRS Expansion” bill as a “historic victory for the United States and the planet.” The legislation, which is expected to pass the House later this week, solves climate change by giving Americans earning $300,000 a year tax credits to buy an $80,000 electric SUV for just $72,500. It also allocates $10 million to combat “racial equity issues” within the Department of Agriculture.

Cryin’ Brian is best known for supporting colonialism and exploiting indigenous land; he claims to “represent” Hawaii despite being a white man born in Michigan to a Canadian doctor.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

In June, Toyota warned buyers of its bZ4X electric SUV not to drive their vehicles for fear the wheels could fall off. Toyota said at the time the cause was a mystery, but it would look into the glitch.

Toyota has not yet found a solution to the problem and is offering to buy back the SUV from its owners, according to CNN.

“We know that our customers have many choices when it comes to purchasing a vehicle. We appreciate their loyalty and are supporting them through this recall,” Toyota said in a statement, according to The Verge. “However, if a customer does not want to proceed with the provided options, we will offer to repurchase their bZ4X.”

Plan B for owners who want to keep a vehicle they may never be able to drive is to have free use of another Toyota vehicle until such time as Toyota figures out what went wrong and how to fix it.

Toyota offers to buy back recalled bZ4X fully electric SUV from customers | A headline writer’s dream. Toyota’s first full #EV recalled and a buyback offer literally because the wheels keep falling off! How can a car maker get something so basic, so wrong? https://t.co/lDJo4u43Zr pic.twitter.com/n9lcYPTgIo

— Martyn Dews (@Yorkie71) August 8, 2022

As part of that deal, Toyota will pay $5,000 toward an owner’s car payments or as a partial refund. Toyota also said that it will extend the factory warranty on the bZ4X by whatever length of time it becomes before an owner gets her or his vehicle back, according to CNN.

The offer for those who do not sell their vehicle back also includes free EV charging once the owners get the vehicle back and the cost of gasoline for their loaner, according to Autoweek.

It was unclear in the announcement how owners of the vehicle, whose price starts at $43,215, would handle dealer markups, according to Car and Driver.

In June, the company announced that all 2,700 of its new electric bZ4X SUVs were a danger to their drivers, with only 260 to date having been delivered in the United States.

“After low-mileage use, all of the hub bolts on the wheel can loosen to the point where the wheel can detach from the vehicle,” Toyota said in a June 23 statement on its website.

“If a wheel detaches from the vehicle while driving, it could result in a loss of vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash,” the company said. “The cause of the issue and the driving patterns under which this issue could occur are still under investigation. No one should drive these vehicles until the remedy is performed,” Toyota said.

“No remedy is available at this time,” Toyota said in its June release.

Toyota’s somehow gone from “The best built cars in the world” to “The hub bolts loosen which may cause a wheel to fall off, & almost two months later we don’t know how to fix it”https://t.co/wOJjNc44pW

— Thomas McGuire (@thommcg1980) August 7, 2022

Related:

E-Scooter/Bike Battery Sparks Apartment Blaze, Kills Woman and Child, Leaves Father in Critical Condition

In a column for Bloomberg, Anjani Trivedi, who covers industrial companies in Asia, wrote, “If that’s the level of quality and safety traditional auto giants are willing to commit to, then investors and regulators should increase their scrutiny.”

The bZ4X debuted in Japan in June, according to CNBC.

The company’s president, Akio Toyoda, said in December that Toyota planned “to roll out 30 BEV models by 2030.”

“Toyota has been under pressure to up its game in EVs, so will be very disappointed that a recall has been necessary on its first mass-market electric cars,” David Leggett, automotive editor at GlobalData, told CNBC.

SURPRISE! THE LEFT STILL CAN’T MEME.

Dark Brandon’ is the Biden White House’s cringetastic effort to win back the “Let’s Go Brandon” meme that haunted the perennially COVID-hit President through late 2021 and early 2022. The efforts, shared by taxpayer-funded White House staff, combines an almost year-late rebuttal to the Brandon memes with the Byronic aethestic of the well established “Dark MAGA” movement.

One more problem: it’s extremely ‘Third Reich‘ in nature.

That’s right. On the day the media wants us to buy the idea that Donald Trump demanded his Generals behaved like Nazis, the current White House is actually promoting Nazi memes to hype its passage of the Inflation Recovery Act (IRA). The timing by the White House isn’t bad, to be honest, since the IRA (another irony not lost on us) does in fact empower the U.S. government with a Stormtrooper-style IRS to snoop through your taxes (all at your expense, of course).

But there’s more to this story than the White House using the Reichsadler or Parteiadler in its memes. 

The first thing to note is that this “Dark Brandon” stuff is actually being promoted by corporate media outlets. Check out Slate’s take, which concludes: “If he can muster a smidge of momentum from the al-Zawahiri assassination by pulling up the cowl of Dark Brandon, then that is surely better than whatever he’s got going right now. After all, Joe Biden’s approval rating is already cresting back toward 40 percent. Dark Brandon strikes again!”

MUST READ: REVEALED: CNN, CNBC, AP Met With Chinese Communist Party Propagandists in July.

Sycophantic though Slate may be, the author isn’t wrong. Rasmussen polling has consistently noted that when Biden is away in his basement, hiding from COVID-19, his approval numbers go up. No wonder the White House would rather use cartoon images of him on social media. The left’s pro-Nazi memes are literally more popular than the real Joe Biden.

Mel Magazine – which appears to be some kind of soy-sponsored blog site for, uh, funboys – offers, “Okay, I pledge my soul to Dark Brandon. What’s the worst that could happen? Not like Regular Brandon was doing such a bang-up job. Trust the process. We’re finally winning.”

Sounds totally normal.

Even Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper has been hyping “Dark Brandon,” alongside the Daily Dot, as well as the Independent newspaper (which ironically is hyper-dependent on Russia and Saudi oligarch largesse).

But there’s one more part of the Dark Brandon saga. The cherry on the cake. And that is the aesthetic origin of the entire thing.

“You have this very exaggerated image of a very ‘evil Biden,’ but also, his ability to mobilize these public intellectual zombies in an image is also kind of funny because it has long been China’s accusation of the U.S. government, that the U.S. is using folks like public intellectuals and scholars within China to carry out ‘peaceful evolution,’” Victor Shih, associate professor at UC San Diego, told POLITICO.

That’s right – it comes from China. Specifically, by an artist named Yang Quan, who sought to portray Biden in a negative light in early 2022.

Yes, the pro-Biden memes being disseminated from the hallowed halls of the White House are both Third Reich in nature, and hail from the Chinese Communist Party’s fellow travelers.

MUST READ: EXC: Wuhan Institute of Virology’s ‘Bat Woman’ Is Still Hunting Bats For ‘Recombinant’ Research.

Even when the left tries their very hardest to meme: they end up being utterly, utterly cringe.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has criticized Democrats for pushing their so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which he warns is a “terrible bill.”

The bill will double the size of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). But IRS agents are not designed to go after “billionaires and big corporations,” Cruz said in an interview with Fox News. “They’re designed to come after small businesses and working families across this country … The Democrats are making the IRS bigger than the Pentagon, plus the Department of State, plus the FBI, plus the Border Patrol combined … This is a massive power grab.”

Senate Democrats passed the Inflation Reduction Act on Aug. 7 with a 51 to 50 vote, with Democrat Vice President Kamala Harris casting her tie-breaking vote in favor of her party. The estimated $740 billion package now heads to the House for vote.

Over $300 billion will go to climate change and energy, which is the largest clean energy investment made by a federal government in American history. It also includes tax credits for electric vehicles. The bill institutes a 15 percent minimum tax for corporations making over $1 billion a year.

Cruz warned that the Inflation Reduction Act will “drive up gas prices” and “kill manufacturing jobs.” The bill has “billions in new taxes” charged against U.S. gas and oil production, a decision that will raise gas prices at the pump, he said.

According to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), the bill will “reduce” the U.S. budget deficit.

But a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office (CRO) shows that even though the budget deficit will be lowered by $101.5 billion over a 10-year period, the deficit will actually increase by $24.6 billion in the first six years between 2022 and 2027.

Widespread Criticism

Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Dallas on Saturday, former president Donald Trump warned that the Inflation Reduction Act will worsen inflation, which is already at a four-decade high.

Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) will pay a political price for backing the spending bill, he predicted.

In an Aug. 8 Twitter post, Sen. Masha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) called the $80 billion set aside to double the number of IRS agents as practically giving “every American a personalized tax auditor.”

Instead of increasing taxes, the government should be focusing on reducing them, she insisted. The Democrats’ “socialist agenda” will make the life of Tennesseans “more difficult and expensive.”

“It’s a special kind of stupid to raise taxes during both a recession and inflation—that’s called stagflation, which is what we have right now as a result of Biden’s policies,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said on Twitter.

There are also worries about the 15 percent book minimum tax affecting small and mid-sized businesses that make below $1 billion a year.

An analysis of the tax rules by Americans for Tax Reform states that the minimum tax will be applicable to any company that has private equity in its capital structure, since the firm will be considered a subsidiary of the private equity firm for tax purposes.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Former President Donald Trump has warned Americans to brace for something “a lot worse than a recession” while blaming the Biden administration’s poor stewardship of the economy for soaring inflation and denouncing the tax hikes in the latest Democrat spending bill.

Trump made the remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Dallas on Saturday, where the former president raised the alarm on the state of the union.

“Our country is being shot. It’s being destroyed,” Trump told attendees, while touting his administration’s record on the economy and national security.

Trump spoke of “creating the most secure border in American history, record tax and regulation cuts, $1.87 gasoline, no inflation, low interest rates, record growth in real wages, record growth in our economy.”

Soaring Inflation, Recession

During Trump’s tenure, the highest the Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation gauge came in at was 2.9 percent in July 2018, while in his final month in office, January 2021, inflation clocked in at 1.4 percent.

Under Biden, inflation has climbed steadily, soaring 9.1 percent year-over-year in June 2022, a figure not seen in more than 40 years.

In his speech, Trump drew a contrast with the economy under Joe Biden, blaming the president for the highest inflation in decades that Trump estimates is costing American families as much as $7,000 a year.

“After the pandemic, we handed the radical Democrats the fastest economic recovery ever recorded, the history of our country, ever recorded,” Trump continued. “They’ve turned that into two straight quarters of negative economic growth, also known, despite their protestation to the contrary, as a recession.”

Two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth are a common rule-of-thumb definition for a recession, although recessions in the United States are officially declared by a committee of economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) using a broader definition than the two-quarter rule.

Despite a number of economists arguing that the United States is in a recession based on the two-consecutive-quarters rule, the Biden administration insists that the economy isn’t in a recession, citing NBER’s consideration of a broader range of indicators.

A key argument against recession made by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and others in the Biden administration is that the U.S. labor market remains tight, with unemployment at 3.5 percent and, at 10.7 million, the number of job openings remaining well above the 6 million or so people classified as unemployed.

Worse Than Recession

In his CPAC speech, Trump then issued an ominous warning that, absent a course correction, the recession could spiral into something even worse.

“Just hope that the recession doesn’t turn into a depression, because the way they’re doing things, it could be a lot worse than a recession,” Trump said, echoing similar remarks he made at a rally in Arizona at the end of July, where he warned that “we’re going to have a serious problem” unless political change takes place.

“We got to get this act in order, we have to get this country going, or we’re going to have a serious problem,” Trump said at a rally in Arizona, warning that “we’re going to have a much bigger problem than recession. We’ll have a depression.”

During his appearance at CPAC, Trump issued a call for urgent action at the polls in the upcoming midterms.

“The future of our country is at stake. We don’t have time to wait years and years. We won’t have a country left. What I used to say about Venezuela is true. We have to save the economy, defeat the Biden, Pelosi, Schumer tax hike, which is happening right now tonight,” Trump continued, referring to the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” that cleared the Senate not long after his speech.

Senators passed the sweeping bill, estimated at $740 billion, in a 51–50 vote on Aug. 7, with the package next going to the House for consideration.

During the deliberations, Senate Democrats rejected an amendment offered by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) that sought to ban any of the $80 billion for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from being used to target Americans making less than $400,000 per year.

“My colleagues claim this massive funding boost will allow the IRS to go after millionaires, billionaires and so-called rich ‘tax cheats,’ but the reality is a significant portion raised from their IRS funding bloat would come from taxpayers with income below $400,000,” Crapo said in a statement.

Crapo’s amendment was rejected on a party-line vote, with the Democrat bill including softer language that features a non-binding statement of intention not to squeeze more revenue from America’s middle class.

Tax Hikes

According to an analysis by Americans for Tax Reform, a U.S. advocacy group, the spending bill includes a number of tax hikes on American households and businesses.

This includes a $6.5 billion natural gas tax that ATR says will increase household energy bills, a $12 billion crude oil tax that will end up being passed on to drivers in the form of higher gas prices, and a $52 billion income tax hike on mid-sized and family businesses.

In a separate analysis, ATR said that the Democrat bill’s changes to the book tax threaten small businesses.

Elaborating on that theme, economist and author Antonio Graceffo wrote in an op-ed for The Epoch Times that the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” would drive up prices for American households.

“Nearly half of these new taxes will be paid by manufacturers, creating disincentives to produce. Diminished industrial output will drive up the cost of goods and reduce the variety and quantity of goods available on store shelves,” Graceffo wrote.

“Beyond the manufacturing sector, the act increases taxes on businesses in general, which, combined with higher interest rates will decrease new investment and hamper job creation. Ultimately, these increased costs will be passed on to customers,” he added.

‘We Have to Win’

During his CPAC speech, Trump revealed what he sees as the key to bringing the country and its economy back on track.

“We have to win an earth-shattering victory in 2022. We have to do it, coming up in November,” Trump said.

“This election needs to be a national referendum on the horrendous catastrophes the radical Democrats have inflicted on our country,” he continued.

“The Republican party needs to campaign on a clear pledge that, if they are given power, they’re going to fight with everything they have to shut down the border, stop the crime wave, beat inflation, and hold the Biden administration accountable. They have to hold it accountable. Job number one for the next Congress,” Trump said.

The national midterm election takes place on Nov. 8, with 34 Senate seats and all 435 House seats up for grabs.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Senate approved the Democrats’ sweeping health care and climate bill on Aug. 7 in a 51–50 vote, with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tiebreaking vote.

The estimated $740 billion package next goes to the House for consideration.

“It’s been a long, tough and winding road, but at last, at last we have arrived,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. “The Senate is making history. I am confident the Inflation Reduction Act will endure as one of the defining legislative measures of the 21st century.”

Senators engaged in a round-the-clock marathon of voting that began on Aug. 6 and stretched into the afternoon of Aug. 7. Democrats voted against some three dozen Republican amendments to the legislation.

The bill ran into trouble midday over objections to a 15 percent corporate minimum tax that was disliked by private equity firms and other industries, forcing last-minute changes.

“It will close tax loopholes and it will reduce and reduce the deficit,” Schumer said. “It will help every citizen in this country and make America a much better place.”

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), a U.S. advocacy group, stated that the measure will increase taxes on thousands of mid-sized small businesses across the United States.

“Any business that has [private equity] in its capital structure is now considered a subsidiary of that firm and thus subject to 15 percent book tax,” John Kartch, a spokesman for ATR, wrote on Twitter.

“As written, the provision now appears restructured to define any company with private equity in its capital structure to be considered a subsidiary of that private equity firm for purposes of the tax,” the group said in a statement. “This means that these companies would now be swept up in the new 15 percent tax on book income. This provision would greatly expand the reach of the book minimum tax to apply to small and midsize companies that require capital investment to grow their business.”

Concerns over objections to the corporate minimum tax on private equity firms and other industries threatened to slow the progress.

Republicans said the measure would undermine an economy that policymakers are struggling to keep from plummeting into recession. They said the bill’s business taxes would hurt job creation and force prices skyward, making it harder for people to cope with the nation’s worst inflation since the 1980s.

“Democrats have already robbed American families once through inflation, and now their solution is to rob American families a second time,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on the floor.

Spending and tax increases in the legislation would eliminate jobs while having an insignificant impact on inflation and climate change, the Kentucky Republican said.

Starting late on Aug. 6, the Senate began its so-called “vote-a-rama” that comes before the final passage in the Senate’s budget reconciliation process. Democrats used the process to pass the bill along party lines so as to avoid the 60-vote filibuster, and Harris served as a tiebreaker on several amendments in the 50–50 Senate.

More Details

The bill came to the floor about a week after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) announced he came to an agreement with Schumer in what is believed to be an attempt to boost Democrats’ and Biden’s chances during the 2022 midterms amid months of negative polling. Biden’s original climate and social measure collapsed after it was opposed by Manchin, who said it was too costly and would fuel inflation.

“The Inflation Reduction Act is the product of years of bipartisan conversations about the most impactful ways to produce more energy domestically, bring down energy and healthcare costs and pay down our debt. The IRA achieves this without raising taxes,” Manchin wrote on Twitter.

Around the same time, the West Virginia Democrat said he would vote down GOP amendments.

“Despite this, my [Republican] friends have made clear they’re completely unwilling to support this bill under any condition. None of their amendments would change that,” Manchin said.

Meanwhile, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) offered amendments to further expand the legislation’s health benefits, and those efforts were defeated. Most votes were forced by Republicans and many were designed to make Democrats look soft on issues such as U.S.–Mexico border security, gasoline and energy costs, and like bullies for wanting to strengthen IRS tax law enforcement.

Late on Aug. 6, Sanders said the measure won’t reduce inflation and said it also doesn’t go far enough with its climate-related measures.

“I want to take a moment to say a few words about the so-called Inflation Reduction Act’ that we are debating this evening,” he said from the Senate floor. “And I say so-called, by the way, because according to the [Congressional Budget Office], and other economic organizations that study this bill, it will, in fact, have a minimal impact on inflation.

“At a time when the drug companies are enjoying huge profits, the pharmaceutical industry will still be allowed to charge the American people by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

UPDATE: This article has been updated to include Sen. Joe Manchin’s full title. 

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Senate’s rules expert has approved provisions in a major bill Senate Democrats want to pass soon called the Inflation Reduction Act, according to top Democrats in the body.

Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough ruled that tax incentives for renewable energy and other related provisions can stand, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said.

“I’m especially pleased that our prevailing wage provisions were approved,” Wyden said in a statement. “These provisions guarantee wage rates for clean energy projects. Clean energy jobs will be good-paying jobs.”

Another piece that would enable Medicare to negotiate the price of prescription drugs with pharmaceutical companies was also cleared, according to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).

“This is a major victory for the American people,” Schumer said.

Medicare is a health insurance program run by the federal government that primarily covers people aged 65 and older. About 64 million people are covered by the program.

Private insurers are already allowed to negotiate prices with drug companies.

MacDonough did strike down another portion of the bill, which would have essentially forced companies not to raise prices higher than inflation.

“While there was one unfortunate ruling … in that the inflation rebate is more limited in scope, the overall program remains intact and we are one step closer to finally taking on Big Pharma and lowering Rx drug prices for millions of Americans,” Schumer said.

Additional portions have not yet been fully vetted.

All Democrats Support Bill

The mammoth $433 billion bill has the backing of all 50 Democrats in Congress after swing Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) threw their support behind the legislation.

“We have agreed to remove the carried interest tax provision, protect advanced manufacturing, and boost our clean energy economy in the Senate’s budget reconciliation legislation,” Sinema, the last Democrat to announce her support, said in a statement this week. “Subject to the Parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward.”

Joe Biden and other Democrats have said the bill will help Americans save money, but experts are divided on the potential impact.

The bill is aimed at reducing energy costs, transitioning to “cleaner production” by incentivizing solar and other alternative forms of production, lowering health care premiums, increasing taxes on the rich, and reducing the deficit to “fight inflation,” according to Democrats.

Most Republicans appear opposed to the bill.

“Congressional Democrats are pushing a massive tax-and-spend proposal that will crush Americans already struggling under record-high inflation. Cutting wasteful spending would ease inflation. Spending more money will only make it worse,” Rep. Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.) said in a statement.

“If a truth-in-advertising law were applied to the ‘Inflation Reduction Act,’ Democrats would be guilty. Their proposal would do nothing to tame inflation,” added Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.).

Democrats hold a majority in the upper chamber because the party controls the White House. That means, in the event of a 50–50 tie, Vice President Kamala Harris can cast a tiebreaking vote.

Schumer has said the Senate will vote on Aug. 6 to advance the bill, triggering hours of debate. A final vote can happen as soon as Sunday.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Critics say the bill will slash economic growth and spur further inflation

I’m with the critics. Just because you have checks in your checkbook…and who in the hell thinks you can spend your way out of inflation? Oh yeah. I forgot. Mathematics is racist, so we can’t use it anymore. [US Patriot]

Despite Democrats’ claims that the Inflation Reduction Act (Destroy America Act) will ultimately serve to reduce consumer prices and spur economic growth, experts remain divided, with some predicting that the bill will worsen inflation and lead to stagnation in growth.

The bill, hammered out as a compromise agreement between moderate Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), serves to fulfill a series of broad Democrat aspirations: increasing federal revenue by closing so-called tax “loopholes,” climate change policies, expansion of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as “Obamacare,” and reducing prescription drug prices.

The act, according to its supporters, will also help to slow the growth of the ballooning U.S. national debt by decreasing the deficit.

Though it authorizes around $433 billion in new spending, Democrats’ internal estimates suggest that the bill will bring in around $725 billion in new revenue to the federal government, thus reducing the federal deficit and slowing the growth of national debt. Specifically, Democrats estimate that the bill will reduce the deficit by around $292 billion annually.

Joe Biden issued a statement on July 27 expressing support for the new proposal, which he called “the action the American people have been waiting for.”

“This addresses the problems of today—high health-care costs and overall inflation—as well as investments in our energy security for the future,” Biden said.

IRS to Receive $80 Billion for Stricter Tax Code Enforcement

Proponents of the measure hope to offset the cost of new spending in the bill by altering the tax code, which would then be enforced by a substantially bulked-up Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which is set to gain around $80 billion through the package.

Among other provisions, the bill would impose a new 15 percent minimum tax rate on all corporations that bring in more than $1 billion per year. Though the current corporate tax rate is technically 21 percent, Democrats say that the new minimum tax rate will target large corporations who pay substantially less than 21 percent by using loopholes.

This change, Democrats estimated in a one-page summary of the bill, will bring in an additional $313 billion annually for the federal government.

Proponents of the bill suggest that, in addition to the new tax code changes, a bulkier IRS will bring in an additional $124 billion annually through the enforcement of the package’s tax code reforms.

Broken down, the roughly $80 billion appropriation to the IRS will go toward “necessary expenses for tax enforcement activities … to determine and collect owed taxes, to provide legal and litigation support, to conduct criminal investigations (including investigative technology), to provide digital asset monitoring and compliance activities, to enforce criminal statutes related to violations of internal revenue laws and other financial crimes … and to provide other services.”

In addition, the funds would go to hire tens of thousands of new IRS agents to further aid enforcement of the new tax rules—which likely will mean far more audits across the board.

Unsurprisingly, the effort to expand the IRS is not popular with Republicans, who have generally opposed such efforts in the past.

“Democrats are scheming to double the size of the IRS by hiring an army of 87,000 new agents to spy on Americans,” wrote House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in an Aug. 4 tweet.

In their one-page summary of the bill, Democrats insisted that the tax code changes would have no effect on families making less than $400,000 annually, a position carried over from the original effort to pass the Build Back Better Act (BBB).

“There are no new taxes on families making $400,000 or less and no new taxes on small businesses—we are closing tax loopholes and enforcing the tax code,” the summary says.

Some critics have expressed doubt about this claim, however, noting that the increased scope and funding of the IRS will affect people across income levels, including some individuals and small businesses making less than $400,000.

Prescription Drug Pricing Changes

Further helping to cushion the cost of the bill, Democrats say, are new provisions designed to lower the amount that the federal government pays for Medicare recipients’ drugs.

Currently, Medicare is not allowed to negotiate the price of prescription drugs with pharmaceutical companies, in contrast to private insurers who do have such power. Under the Inflation Reduction Act, Medicare will be authorized to begin such negotiations on the cost of 10 “high-spend” drugs, beginning in 2026.

In addition, the bill would cap out-of-pocket costs for Medicare beneficiaries, who are largely senior citizens, to $2,000 per year, or around $150 per month.

These changes, Democrats claim in their summary of the bill, will bring in an additional $288 billion in revenue to the federal government.

However, critics have questioned the focus on prescription drug pricing, noting that spending on pharmaceuticals only comprises around 15 percent of Medicare spending. Topping the list of Medicare expenditures are things like hospital inpatient care.

Further, the bill contains provisions designed to lower Americans’ premiums under the Affordable Care Act.

New Climate Policies, Spending

Since the failure of the BBB in December, Democrats have remained as desperate as ever to make wide-reaching changes to climate policy, and the Inflation Reduction Act would create a series of new programs and appropriations to that end.

The top line price of the climate policies in the bill comes out to around $369 billion.

Among other elements, the Inflation Reduction Act emphasizes tax incentives for companies and individuals who switch to renewable energy sources.

For instance, the bill would dole out as much as $28,500 in tax incentives to American households who buy more energy-efficient electric home appliances, install solar panels on their homes, and buy new electric vehicles. Though households would need to do all of these to come close to that $28,500 figure, it represents one of the largest government climate incentives ever put forward for individual households.

According to a study by Rewiring America, families who take advantage of all of these programs could see energy savings of as much as $1,800 per year.

Proponents of the bill have also pointed to an Energy Innovation study that suggests that by 2030, the Inflation Reduction Act’s climate incentives could create as many as 1.5 million new jobs.

Also, front-and-center for Democrats in the bill is its potential effect on reducing U.S. carbon emissions.

During negotiations on the bill, Manchin insisted on including several provisions designed to help the energy sector in West Virginia—which is dominated by coal mining.

In addition, the bill would require the reinstatement of three oil and natural gas leases that were halted by the White House near the beginning of Biden’s term. Solar and wind project permits on federal lands would also only be permitted if these oil and natural gas leases are retained.

Nevertheless, a key focus for Democrats was to de-incentivize fossil fuels as much as practicable.

Just as the bill would incentivize individual households to switch to renewable and efficient energy sources, corporations also stand to gain tax incentives, loans, and grants to do the same on a larger scale.

Proponents of the bill have cited various analyses suggesting that these policies would cause a net reduction in U.S. emissions of somewhere around 40 percent over their 2005 levels.

Democrats supporting the bill have said that the effects of pro-fossil fuel provisions in the bill—which angered environmentalists—would ultimately have a negligible effect on emissions. Proponents say that for every additional ton of greenhouse gas emissions in the bill, 24 tons of emissions would be cut.

This section comprises by far the largest chunk of spending in the new bill, and critics have pointed to it with concerns that it will reduce U.S. energy competitiveness and have suggested that the new spending may serve to worsen inflation.

Some Experts Applaud Bill as Much Needed, Anti-Inflationary

Marc Goldwein, senior director of policy at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, applauded the bill during an appearance on Yahoo news.

At the beginning of the segment, Goldwein was asked what effect the bill will have on inflation.

“Look, this bill is not gonna get us from nine percent inflation down to the two or three percent it should be,” Goldwein said. “What this bill does is it’s gonna make the Federal Reserve’s job just a little bit easier, so they can fight inflation with fiscal policy moving in the same direction, not the opposite direction.”

Later in the interview, Goldwein reaffirmed this position: “No matter how you look at this bill, it’s gonna be good for inflation.”

“Macro-economically, it’s gonna take some excess money out of the economy, which we need when demand is so overheated, [and] it’s also gonna lower drug prices.

“Micro-economically, it’s gonna reduce the sticker prices that people and businesses see for energy, updates to their homes, for health care, for drugs—and all of that is gonna hopefully feed the inflation expectations.

“I don’t expect the effect to be large, but the direction is pretty clear and it’s gonna help to make the Fed’s job easier.”

However, Goldwein emphasized that, despite Democrats’ hopes that the bill will aid their dismal outlook for the midterms later this year, Americans won’t see any real effect on inflation in calendar year 2022.

“Really this is a 2023, 2024, 2025 game,” Goldwein said. “What this is supposed to do is stop inflation from persisting over the long term—again, make the Fed’s job a little bit easier. It’s not gonna provide relief next month, and we shouldn’t expect that.”

Asked about the implications of the bill on the federal deficit, Goldwein affirmed Democrats’ claims that through the new 15 percent minimum tax and expansion of the IRS, the bill would greatly increase revenue and reduce the deficit by about $300 billion, which, Goldwein noted, is “the largest deficit reduction since 2011.”

Over two decades or so, Goldwein added, that comes out to around $1.5 trillion spared from being added to the national debt.

“That’s not gonna fix our debt just like this isn’t gonna fix inflation,” Goldwein admitted, “but it’s gonna help with our debt, just like this is gonna help with inflation.”

Republican and conservative critics of the bill have argued that through the new corporate taxes, capital investment will diminish, slowing the growth of the economy.

This, Goldwein acknowledged, is true. But, he said, limiting growth is exactly what the economy needs right now.

“The reality right now is that the economy is overheated,” Goldwein said. “We have too much money chasing too few goods. … There’s a lot more we can do. But this is a piece of the puzzle. This is gonna help make it a little bit easier for the Fed to get inflation under control.”

Larry Summers, an inflation expert and former Treasury Secretary often quoted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), shared Goldwein’s sanguine assessment of the bill.

“This bill is fighting inflation and it’s got a whole set of collateral benefits as well,” Summers said during an appearance on CNN. “It’s fair to call it the ‘Inflation Reduction Act.’”

Bill Will Shrink GDP, Cause Thousands of Lost Jobs: Tax Foundation

These sanguine assessments are far from universal, however. Several conservative and Republican-leaning experts and organizations have been critical in their analysis of the bill, which they have said would at best have a negligible effect on inflation while stagnating economic growth.

In its analysis of the bill the Tax Foundation, a tax information nonprofit, estimated that the bill “would reduce long-run economic output by about 0.1 percent and eliminate about 30,000 full-time equivalent jobs in the United States.”

Further, they estimated, “it would also reduce average after-tax incomes for taxpayers across every income quintile over the long run.”

“By reducing long-run economic growth, this bill may actually worsen inflation by constraining the productive capacity of the economy,” the group argued.

Later down their report, the Tax Foundation explained the claim, noting that while the bill would avoid some of the direct tax increases contained in the original iteration of the BBB, it would nevertheless have a pronounced effect on capital investment.

“While the latest proposal steers clear of some of the major tax rate increases contained in the House-passed Build Back Better Act, this proposal would raise taxes on work and investment, disincentivizing productive activity,” the organization wrote.

“The bill would increase long-run American incomes (as measured by gross national product, or GNP) by less than 0.05 percent, which is entirely driven by the bill’s reduction in the budget deficit over the long run. The bill would reduce the capital stock by about 0.3 percent and wages by about 0.1 percent, while eliminating about 30,000 full-time equivalent jobs.

“The proposed 15 percent minimum tax on corporate book income is the most economically damaging provision in the bill, reducing GDP by 0.1 percent and costing about 23,000 jobs. The tax increase on carried interest also eliminates about 5,000 jobs.”

Bill Will Disincentivize Capital Investment, Causing Long-Term Stagnation: Heritage Foundation Tax Expert

Preston Brashers, a senior tax policy analyst for the right-leaning Heritage Foundation, shared the Tax Foundation’s pessimistic appraisal in an interview with The Epoch Times.

Specifically, Brashers emphasized the negative effects that the new tax laws, including the new corporate minimum tax, will have on capital investment.

The problem, Brashers said, is the way that the bill would change the rules about determining whether a corporation meets the standard for the minimum tax.

Under the Inflation Reduction Act, corporations with an annual income of $1 billion or more will be subject to a 15 percent minimum tax. Though current tax law sets the corporate tax rate at 21 percent, many corporations ultimately pay less once write-offs, exemptions, and workarounds in the tax law are taken into account. Through the corporate minimum tax, Democrats hope to end these practices.

However, rather than using tax income—which takes into account exemptions and write-offs—to determine whether the minimum tax applies, the Democrats’ bill would use the “book income” to determine applicability.

The “book income,” reported under standards developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and enforced by the Securities and Exchange Commission, is the figure handed to investors to show a company’s annual income before any taxes paid or written off are taken into account.

Under current rules, when corporations reinvest their income into the business—by purchasing things like new equipment, machinery, factories, and other types of capital—they are permitted to write the cost of such investments off as a matter of tax income.

Book income, on the other hand, does not take such expenses into account—it is simply a report of the net revenue a corporation brings in over an annual period.

“If I’m a business, and I buy some new machinery—put some new machinery in my factory—that expense, under the book income system, I wouldn’t be able to deduct that [from book income] right away,” Brashers explained.

“The whole point of book income is totally different from taxable income,” Brashers argued.

Because of this, the new corporate minimum tax is “a major disincentive for companies to invest. So what’s gonna happen then is they’re gonna invest less—there’s gonna be fewer factories.”

Brashers said that those hardest hit by these new rules will be manufacturers and other capital-intensive industries like mining, which, by the nature of their enterprises, necessarily have far more capital expenses if they hope to continue growing.

However, new and growing firms will also be hit hard, to the benefit of older and more established firms. Older firms often see dwindling opportunities for reinvestment, and instead opt to pay investors dividends while they run “on autopilot,” Brashers said. Newer and growing companies, on the other hand, often have many capital investment needs.

Thus, this bill will also serve to make it harder for new competitors to enter established markets.

Brashers said that the new rules will also muddy the waters around FASB-compliant financial statements in a way that may drive investors away from investing in U.S. companies. Because companies will have tax incentives to reduce their book income, Brashers explained, the figures investors see may be somewhat bleaker financially than the actual facts on the ground at the firm.

“What companies are gonna be doing for their financial statements is gonna be driven more by tax incentives—which is not a good thing,” Brashers said. “It’s gonna lead to investors having worse information about what’s going on with companies, because now [companies] have an incentive to reduce their financial statement income if it’s just gonna cause them to have this book minimum tax.”

In addition, Brashers predicted, basing these new tax rules on FASB financial statements could lead to a new genre of lobbyists who, instead of lobbying Washington lawmakers, lobby the FASB to encourage it to change its financial statement rules.

On an international scale, these changes could drive investors out of U.S. markets, Brashers suggested, to countries like China, where these rules are not in place.

Taking these things together, Brashers contended: “there’s gonna be fewer jobs, and the people who are working in those jobs are gonna have less capital around them—less tools, less equipment—which means that each worker [will be] less productive.” Workers producing less, in turn, will lead to lower wages and slowing wage growth—meaning that individual Americans will also be hit by the unintended consequences of the bill.

In summary, Brashers said: “This bill is exactly the wrong approach. We’re heading into a recession—and they wanna raise taxes; we’re dealing with inflation—and they want to add to the cost of doing things in this country. This approach is exactly wrong because rather than unfettering the economy and allowing businesses to produce and workers to work more and do more, we’re just making it harder.”

Bill on Track to Pass the Senate in Coming Days

Whatever the truth of the varied expert assessments of the bill, it now appears to have a straight shot through the Senate.

Because the Inflation Reduction Act uses the reconciliation process, it is exempt from the normal 60-vote filibuster threshold that kills most partisan bills in the Senate. Instead, only 51 votes are needed for the passage of a reconciliation bill.

Currently, Democrats hold just enough seats to pass the bill, including 50 Democrat senators and the tie-breaking vote of Vice President Kamala Harris.

In the past, Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Manchin, the two swing-voting members of the Democrats in the upper chamber, have been the largest threat to the passage of any overly ambitious reconciliation bill from their party. As soon as the agreement was unveiled by Manchin and Schumer, Manchin vowed his support for the legislation, leaving a question mark only on Sinema.

Despite some hopes among critics that Sinema would hold out against the bill, denying it of the 50 votes needed to activate Harris’ tie-breaking vote, her office announced late in the evening on Aug. 4 that Sinema had decided to back the bill.

The original draft of the bill would have closed the “carried interest loophole,” a tax code workaround that allows money managers to pay a lower tax rate than normal on profitable investments. This proposal, which was part of the original BBB plan, would have brought in another $14 billion in revenue, Democrats said.

As part of committing her support for the bill, Sinema demanded that this provision be removed, despite Manchin’s expressed demands that the provision remain in the bill. Democrat negotiators acceded to Sinema’s request, paving a way forward for the bill.

“We have agreed to remove the carried interest tax provision, protect advanced manufacturing, and boost our clean energy economy in the Senate’s budget reconciliation legislation,” Sinema said.

Only the approval of the Senate parliamentarian, a nonpartisan referee in the upper chamber whose go-ahead is necessary for reconciliation bills, remains left for the quick passage of the bill through the Senate.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has expressed support for the bill, and it is likely that the House will take up and pass the bill following its passage in the Senate.

Biden, likewise, is likely to sign it upon its approval by both chambers of Congress.

Source: The Epoch Times

Joe Biden, 79, remains on Death Watch™ with COVID-19

Democratic lawmakers spent the better part of two years assailing their Republican colleagues for not taking the COVID-19 pandemic seriously enough for their liking. Nevertheless, these same Democrats are flagrantly disregarding COVID safety protocols to ensure the timely passage of a massive tax-hike and spending bill before Congress adjourns for the summer recess.

“Senate Democrats, some of whom have decried their G.O.P. colleagues’ lenient attitude toward masking, have adopted an unofficial ‘Don’t Test, Don’t Tell,’ protocol of late, particularly as they endeavor to pass the historic Inflation Reduction Act this weekend,” Tara Palmeri of Puck reports.

(Note: It is not clear what the word “historic” means in this context. There is no evidence to support this claim.)

A senior Senate aide told Puck the upper chamber would not delay a vote on the Inflation Reduction Act in the event that a senator tests positive for COVID. Some members have even said they plan to stop testing themselves for the virus. “It’s not an official mandate but we all know we’re not letting COVID get in the way,” the aide said. “The deal is happening. Less testing, just wear masks and get it done.”

(Note: We are literally shaking right now.) 

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) has said there is no “plan B” when it comes to passing the controversial spending package, insisting that Democrats are “going to stay healthy.” Another source told Puck that senators who contract COVID, which has killed more than 620,000 Americans on Joe Biden’s watch, could “bring [their] ventilator and still vote.”

(Note: This is reckless behavior and should not be condoned. People are going to die.)

Speaking of Biden, the 79-year-old president remains on Washington Free Beacon Death Watch™ as he continues to test positive for COVID-19, a virus that is most likely to be fatal for individuals over the age of 65. Biden, who will turn 80 in November, has already outlived the average life expectancy for American men (75.1 years).

READ MORE: Joe Biden Death Watch, By the Numbers

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Manchin-backed Inflation Reduction Act would more than double agency’s size

If Democrats have their way, one of the most detested federal agencies—the Internal Revenue Service—will employ more bureaucrats than the Pentagon, State Department, FBI, and Border Patrol combined.

Under the Inflation Reduction Act negotiated by Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.), the agency would receive $80 billion in funding to hire as many as 87,000 additional employees. The increase would more than double the size of the IRS workforce, which currently has 78,661 full-time staffers, according to federal data.

The additional IRS funding is integral to the Democrats’ reconciliation package. A Congressional Budget Office analysis found the hiring of new IRS agents would result in more than $200 billion in additional revenue for the federal government over the next decade. More than half of that funding is specifically earmarked for “enforcement,” meaning tax audits and other responsibilities such as “digital asset monitoring.”

That would make the IRS one of the largest federal agencies. The Pentagon houses roughly 27,000 employees, according to the Defense Department, while a human resources fact sheet says the State Department employs just over 77,243 staff. The FBI employs approximately 35,000 people, according to the agency’s website, and Customs and Border Protection says it employs 19,536 Border Patrol agents.

The money allocated to the IRS would increase the agency’s budget by more than 600 percent. In 2021, the IRS received $12.6 billion.

Although Democrats say the hiring of additional IRS agents will help root out tax cheats and other criminals, federal tax revenues have steadily risen over the past several decades. Federal tax receipts are projected to hit $5.7 trillion in 2027, up from just over $4 trillion last year without additional IRS agents.

But the roughly $450 billion in new spending proposed by Democrats requires new funding mechanisms. Some of the new spending includes $161 billion for clean electricity tax credits and $64 billion in new Affordable Care Act subsidies.

The majority of new revenue from IRS audits and scrutiny will come from those making less than $200,000 a year, according to a study from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation. The committee found that just 4 to 9 percent of money raised will come from those making more than $500,000, contrary to Democrats’ claims that new IRS agents are necessary to target millionaires and billionaires who hide income.

Senate Republicans argue that the roughly $45 billion the bill puts towards hiring IRS agents could be better spent on other priorities, such as helping students rebound from the learning loss suffered during COVID school closures. A proposal by Sen. Tim Scott (R., S.C.) would amend the spending bill to put the IRS money towards education tax credits.

“When faced with the decision to spend $45 billion on America’s largest revenue collection agency, or give it back to parents to help them get their kids the help they need, the Senate needs to choose the latter option every single time,” Scott told the Free Beacon.

The Washington Free Beacon previously reported that, despite White House claims to the contrary, the Inflation Reduction Act does little to combat inflation. A report from Moody’s Analytics found the Democratic bill will shave just .33 percent from the Consumer Price Index over the next decade.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said it will conduct “flyovers” of the Permian Basin region in Texas and New Mexico to “survey oil and gas operations to identify large emitters of methane” amid the Biden administration’s climate policy initiative.

“The flyovers are vital to identifying which facilities are responsible for the bulk of these emissions and therefore where reductions are most urgently needed,” said Earthea Nance, an EPA official, in an Aug. 1 news release.  The flyovers, which will use infrared cameras, will be conducted until Aug. 15, the agency said.

With the announcement, it means the administration will continue to target the oil and gas industry, coming after Joe Biden sent letters to the heads of major oil companies in June and threatened to take action to increase supply. The move drew pushback from the CEOs of ExxonMobil and Chevron, who both accused Biden of taking an increasingly hostile approach to the industry.

The Permian Basin accounts for 43 percent of the nation’s oil supply, meaning any federal regulation or rules may impact gas prices nationwide.

“The flyovers will continue through August 15. By emphasizing identification of potential super-emitters, this effort builds on previous aerial surveillance efforts in the Permian Basin area starting in 2019,” the EPA release said.

=morning-bell&email=walkerboh2112%40msn.com

Its announcement came days after an Associated Press report claimed that 533 gas and oil facilities in the Permian Basin are emitting what it described as excessive amounts of methane. But an EPA spokesperson told the Washington Post this week that the flyovers are not connected to AP’s article.

Republican Criticism

Republicans are poised to target the EPA’s flyover announcement and blame the Biden administration for causing further pain at the pump.

Several weeks ago, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, warned that an EPA proposal reversing a 2017 decision to designate certain regions in the Permian Basin as compliant with 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards would imperil the U.S. oil supply.

“While you express concern about out-of-control gas prices, your Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is threatening to increase them even further,” Abbot wrote in a letter to the White House in late June. “The EPA’s process could interfere in the production of oil in Texas which could lead to skyrocketing prices at the pump by reducing production, increase the cost of that production, or do both.

“Your administration’s announced action is completely discretionary. Thus, you have the power to stop it. If you do not, this action alone might serve as a catalyst for economic harm leading to an even deeper reliance on imported foreign energy and a faster economic decline into the pending recession by forcing even more pain for American consumers to pay at the pump,” the governor said.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Viktor Orban kicks off CPAC in Dallas

Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister, told hundreds of conservatives in Texas on Thursday that his country defeated communism—and now America must do the same.

Speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas, Orban told the crowd that America is fighting for its life against progressives and globalists, which are communists.

“Don’t be afraid to call your enemies by their name,” he said. “They hate me and slander me and my country, as they hate you and slander you and the America you stand for.”

Orban said the Democrats in the United States were not fond of him and wanted Hungary to move away from being a Christian nationalist state.

“They did not want me to be here, and they made every effort to drive a wedge between us,” he said.

Orban has been criticized as a right-wing Christian nationalist. His anti-immigration stance drew condemnation from the United States and the international community recently after he said Hungarians did not want to become “peoples of mixed race.”

Orban later clarified that the issue isn’t as much about race as it is about culture. While not mentioning the controversy directly, he noted that a Christian politician “cannot be racist.”

‘Lone Star State of Europe’

Orban’s anti-immigration policy earned him a warm welcome in Texas, which is overwhelmed with illegal immigrants under Joe Biden’s border policies.

Orban praised CPAC’s host state of Texas for its independence and freedom, calling Hungary the “Lone Star State of Europe,” much to the delight of the crowd.

The prime minister said that massive immigration is a globalist goal. George Soros, a Hungarian by birth, has an army of followers in institutions across the globe who want to create a post-Western world.

In 2015, Orban said 400,000 illegal immigrants came to Hungary’s borders, but Hungary built a wall and reduced illegal immigration to zero.

Orban’s speech outlined how America and Hungary, which he sees as fighting a common enemy on two fronts, can win against the Marxist movement trying to destroy western civilization. For better or worse, the world looks to America as a great power that will lead the world into the future, he said.

“The West is at war with itself,” he said. “The globalists can all go to hell. I have gone to Texas,” he said, prompting wild clapping and cheers.

Orban said the fight against the far-left starts with understanding that they want to drive a wedge between people and their faith and destroy families. Nazi Germany was able to succeed in a godless environment, he said.

“You must play to win. Play by your own rules,” he said. “This war is a culture war.”

Progressives change language to disguise their Marxist agenda, he said. The ideology wants to destroy the family because Marxism sees it as an oppressive patriarchal system.

Gender ideology and the sexualization of children is an idea of the left meant to harm families. In Hungary, a mother is a woman, and a father is a man. Order is necessary for any free country, meaning law enforcement is respected, he said.

In Hungary, large families are encouraged through tax breaks for having more than two children. With those policies in place, Hungary has seen marriages double and abortions cut in half over the past decade, he said.

“We need a strong America with a strong leader,” he said, adding America must lead the world to defeat the globalists.

The path to victory starts with taking back institutions and turning to faith in God. Orban said America has two years to get ready, alluding to the next presidential election.

Enemies in the media would not view his speech in a favorable light, said Orban, who met with former President Donald Trump before his appearance at CPAC.

“I can already see tomorrow’s headlines: Far-right European racist, anti-Semite strongman, the Trojan horse of Putin, holds a speech at the conservative conference,” he said.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Democrat Logic: Spend hundreds of billions of dollars to reduce inflation. Are you F-ing kidding me?! [US Patriot]

Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) has reached a deal with Democrats over a multi-pronged spending package that lawmakers say would reform the tax code, lower the federal deficit, lower health care costs, and invest in energy and climate change programs.

The spending package appeared to be a revised, alternate version to the Build Back Better (BBB) bill, which would fulfill a major agenda of Joe Biden.

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) previously announced on July 27 that he had reached a deal with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on energy, taxes, and health care to advance the bill, which is dubbed the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.”

Sinema, who previously held out on the deal, said in an announcement on Thursday she would support moving forward with the measure and begin debate on the bill.

“We have agreed to remove the carried interest tax provision, protect advanced manufacturing, and boost our clean energy economy in the Senate’s budget reconciliation legislation,” Sinema said. “Subject to the Parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward.”

Sinema was referring to a provision that would have closed the so-called carried interest loophole and generate an estimated $14 billion in new revenue over the next 10 years. The loophole is said to help wealthy private equity and hedge fund managers pay less taxes.

She was also separately referring to an agreement to protect manufacturing from the impact of a proposed 15 percent corporate minimum tax, which opponents say would jeopardize economic growth.

“Following this effort, I look forward to working with [Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.)] to enact carried interest tax reforms, protecting investments in America’s economy and encouraging continued growth while closing the most egregious loopholes that some abuse to avoid paying taxes,” the Arizona senator said, referring to tax concerns that affect hedge funds.

Schumer said in a statement on Thursday that the agreement “preserves the major components” of the original bill, which includes “reducing prescription drug costs, fighting climate change, closing tax loopholes exploited by big corporations and the wealthy, and reducing the deficit by $300 billion.”

“I am pleased to report that we have reached an agreement on the Inflation Reduction Act that I believe will receive the support of the entire Senate Democratic conference,” he also said. “I have had many productive discussions with members of our conference over the past three days and we have addressed a number of important issues they have raised.”

Schumer said the final version of the bill will be introduced on Saturday.

The Democratic leader seeks to pass the measure through a procedural tool called “reconciliation” that allows a bill related to taxes, spending, and debt to be passed in the chamber by a simple majority rather than having to pass the 60 vote filibuster threshold. The reconciliation process also limits debate on the bill to 20 hours. That could allow the bill to be passed with only Democratic votes, if necessary, if every Democrat is on board.

The bill is expected to include about $370 billion on energy and climate programs and $64 billion to extend subsidies for Affordable Care Act premiums for three years through 2025.

It also seeks generate about $700 billion in new revenue over the next 10 years, which would leave roughly $300 billion in deficit reduction.

A large portion of the $700 billion—an estimated $313 billion—is expected to be generated by increasing the corporate minimum tax to 15 percent, while the remaining amounts include $288 billion in prescription drug pricing reform and $124 billion in Internal Revenue Service tax enforcement.

Support of All 50 Democrats in Senate

Sinema’s announcement means all 50 Democrats in the 50–50 split Senate will support the measure. Democrats hold a majority due to Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking vote.

Biden said in a statement from the White House released late Thursday that “we’ve taken another critical step toward reducing inflation and the cost of living for America’s families,” adding, “I look forward to the Senate taking up this legislation and passing it as soon as possible.”

In a Twitter post on Thursday afternoon, Schumer said the legislation “will be the largest package to fight the climate crisis ever passed by Congress.”

“Republicans want to take away people’s health care, cut taxes for the rich, put Medicare and Social Security on the chopping block, raise taxes on working families,” he said in a separate Twitter post. “Democrats are working to lower inflation, lower Rx drug costs, close tax loopholes exploited by big businesses.”

Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) signaled opposition to the spending package.

“Even the Democrats’ favorite estimate says their so-called inflation bill will take nine years to cut the same amount of inflation that our country added every week in June,” he wrote on Twitter on Aug. 3. “Nine years of huge tax hikes and big spending to remove literally one week’s worth of inflation. A joke.”

“Democrats want to raise families’ electricity, gas, and heating bills so they can send rich people rebates for buying $80,000 electric cars. New taxes on American oil and gas,” he said in another Twitter post. “Costly virtue signaling with no meaningful emissions impact as China keeps emitting more and more.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Democrats and Republicans need to rein in spending: Heritage Foundation’s Joel Griffith

With raging inflation and the Democrat-led Congress gathering enough Senate support to pass billions more in spending, Joel Griffith, a research fellow in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for economic policy studies at The Heritage Foundation, told NTD TV that if the United States does not rein in its irresponsible fiscal actions, the nation is headed for a worse economic crisis.

Griffith said that raising taxes on the wealthy will not get the federal government out of the financial hole it’s dug for itself over the past few decades, particularly the spending that’s occurred in the last two years.

“The only way to pay for all this would be to print the money, to borrow the money, or to raise taxes on the middle class. There’s no easy way out of this,” Griffith said during the interview. “And politicians don’t have an appetite to correct the problem. So, there’s going to be a crisis if we do not correct our ways. It’s just a matter of time.”

By technical definition, the United States already has entered a recession, but the Biden administration continues to deny the facts.

“Everybody loves the goodies, and now we’re suffering the consequences. And it’s so important for people to realize that the economic misery that we’re feeling right now is directly related to the mistakes that were made in the past two years, with shutdowns, with spending, and with printing,” said Griffith.

The U.S. government’s debt now amounts to more than $30 trillion, which calculates to $100,000 per person, and with current interest rates, it’s an additional $1,000 in debt, per person, being added each year, said Griffith.

Democrats’ ‘Inflation Reduction’ Bill

Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced on July 27 that they had enough votes to pass a measure called the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022” (pdf), which seeks to spend some $433 billion—about $369 billion toward energy and climate programs over the next 10 years, and $64 billion toward extending federal subsidies for three more years for some people buying private health insurance.

Meanwhile, many from both sides of the aisle viewed Manchin as a fiscal moderate who would not opt for further government spending, especially during a recession.

Griffith, however, said that he is not surprised by Manchin supporting liberal legislation that will expand the federal government, and hurt his own state of West Virginia, because he has observed that the senator supports liberal policies.

“We know what [Manchin has] supported in the past. And he has been for expanding the size and the scope of government. So I’m disappointed that he has agreed to a package that is going to dramatically increase taxes on businesses, [that] it’s going to actually include more taxes on fossil fuels. And it’s going to even further socialize our health care sector,” said Griffith.

The U.S. consumer is already paying, via taxes and inflation, the trillions of dollars the government spent and printed in the name of pandemic relief, said Griffith. This new package will only make the economy worse off.

“We are suffering through the consequences of too much spending … and to see the Senate now moving forward on a package that’s going to increase taxes and increase [the] costs on fuel production,  it’s unfortunate,” said Griffith.

Not Putin’s Fault

Griffith said for a family with a middle-class income, “We’ve seen your real take-home pay decline by more than $6,000 annually because of all this inflation.”

And even if inflation were to revert to normal tomorrow, about 2 percent annually, it will not negate the economic damage, only lessen it for the future, he said.

“Putting the blame on [Putin] and his actions in the war in Ukraine for rising prices—that’s simply, largely untrue,” said Griffith.

Gas prices were already on the rise long before Russian President Putin invaded Ukraine, said Griffith, adding, “Same thing goes with our food costs, commodity costs, fertilizer costs—all of those were rapidly increasing long before Putin decided to invade Ukraine.”

“Let’s remember, it was our own politicians who shut down our economy. It was our own Congress in the United States that voted to spend $6 trillion that we don’t have. And it was our central bank, our Federal Reserve, that printed $6 trillion out of thin air. That is what is largely responsible for this inflation, not Vladimir Putin,” said Griffith.

Another contributing factor to the poor economy is an aspect of the employment rate called the participation rate (i.e., the percentage of people who are working age and are either working or looking for work), which more accurately describes who is working, said Griffith.

“The [participation rate] is near generational lows. In fact, if we were to have a participation rate that would have remained steady over the past three years … it shows that more than a million people have actually dropped out of our workforce entirely.”

“That’s part of the reason why if you go to a restaurant, a bar, a retail store, you notice the service isn’t so good right now,” added Griffith. “And that’s because relative to our overall population, we have fewer people working today than there were just two and a half years ago.”

There has been some increase in the participation rate in the United States, said Griffith, because “as people draw down on those savings [accumulated during the time when the government was doling out pandemic relief funds], they’re finding it necessary to return to the workforce.”

Middle-Class Most Impacted

Griffith said the money the government is spending is coming from the taxpayer and that this will affect the middle-class the most because they won’t be able to save and “build wealth” because of the current and rampant inflation.

“And that’s what I’m very fearful of—that as we continue to spend far beyond our means, that it’s not just going to have an impact this year, and next year, [but] 10 years and 15 years from now, [and] we’re going to see even fewer opportunities [like the creation of new jobs] for typical American families,” said Griffith.

Mimi Nguyen Ly contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

West Virginia senator’s deal provides tens of billions of dollars in electric vehicle tax credits.

Sen. Joe Manchin’s $485 billion budget reconciliation package includes a provision he once called “ludicrous” and counterproductive to fighting inflation, according to a Washington Free Beacon review of the bill.

The deal Manchin struck with Senate Democrats to fight inflation includes tens of billions of dollars worth of electric vehicle tax credits, a policy once considered a non-starter for Manchin. As recently as April, Democrats thought negotiations reached an impasse after he said electric tax credits “make no sense to me whatsoever.”

“There’s a waiting list for EVs right now with a fuel price at $4.00, but they still want us to throw $5,000 or $7,000 or a $12,000 credit to buy an electric vehicle,” Manchin said on the Senate floor. “We can’t produce enough product for the people that want it and we’re still going to pay them to take it. It’s absolutely ludicrous, in my mind.”

Despite those words, the Inflation Reduction Act includes electric vehicle tax credits for up to $7,500 per vehicle. Those tax benefits apply to any family making up to $300,000 and can be used on any electric vehicle that costs up to $80,000.

The electric vehicle provision is the latest reversal for Manchin, who held up Democratic Party spending plans for more than a year over a litany of concerns that have been seemingly tossed aside. Last week, the bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation concluded that the budget reconciliation package would raise taxes by billions on Americans making less than $200,000. Manchin previously said he would never support tax hikes during a recession, which the U.S. economy entered in July. Why Manchin caved on electric vehicle subsidies is unclear. Manchin said in March that he was “reluctant to go down the path of electric vehicles” over concerns about the ability for manufacturers to meet demand.

“I’m old enough to remember standing in line in 1974 trying to buy gas. I remember those days,” he said. “I don’t want to have to be standing in line waiting for a battery for my vehicle, because we’re now dependent on a foreign supply chain, mostly China.”

Republicans are unanimous in their opposition to the spending package. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell blasted Manchin over hypocrisy last week and called the Inflation Reduction Act a “reckless taxing and spending spree that will delight the far left and hammer working families even harder.”

“They want Americans to be faced with skyrocketing prices and higher taxes and fewer jobs, all at the same time,” McConnell said. “Democrats have outlined a giant package of huge new job-killing tax hikes, Green New Deal craziness that will kill American energy.”

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

President Donald Trump has warned that America’s economy is on track for a bigger disaster than a recession, with his remarks coming shortly before government statistics showed GDP printing negative for the second consecutive quarter, which is a rule-of-thumb definition for a recession.

“Where we’re going now could be a very bad place,” Trump said at a rally in Arizona last week. “We got to get this act in order, we have to get this country going, or we’re going to have a serious problem.”

The former president singled out the collapse in Americans’ real wages, a historically depressed labor force participation rate, and the Democrat push for the Green New Deal that he said would crush economic growth.

“Not recession. Recession’s a nice word. We’re going to have a much bigger problem than recession. We’ll have a depression,” the former president said.

Trump’s remarks came several days before the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) released data showing that real U.S. GDP fell by an annualized 0.9 percent in the second quarter after contracting 1.6 percent in the first quarter.

Two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth are a common rule-of-thumb definition for a recession, although recessions in the United States are officially declared by a committee of economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) using a broader definition than the two-quarter rule.

Vance Ginn, Chief Economist at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, told The Epoch Times’ sister media NTD in an interview that, while officially it’s NBER that calls recessions, the two-quarter rule is “usually how it’s done by a rule of thumb.”

“I think this is definitely recession that we’re in now from these bad policies,” Ginn added, blaming a series of “progressive policies” coming out of the White House and the Democrat-controlled House.

Stagflationary Winds Blowing

In his remarks, Trump also took aim at resident Joe Biden’s handling of the economy, blaming him for soaring inflation.

“Biden created the worst inflation in 47 years. We’re at 9.1 percent, but the actual number is much, much higher than that,” Trump said.

While the former president didn’t provide his own estimate for the true rate of inflation, an alternative CPI inflation gauge developed by economist John Williams, calculated according to the same methodology used by the U.S. government in the 1980s, puts the figure at 17.3 percent, a 75-year high.

Trump also said that persistently high inflation combined with an economic slowdown has put the country “on the verge of a devastating” spell of stagflation, which is a combination of accelerating prices and slowing economic growth.

Inflation is “going higher and higher all the time,” Trump said, adding that it’s “costing families nearly $6,000 a year, bigger than any tax increase ever proposed other than the tax increase that they want to propose right now.”

In Trump’s first full month in office in February 2017, the headline Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation gauge came in at 2.8 percent in annual terms. While the CPI measure fluctuated during his tenure, the highest it ever reached was 2.9 percent in July 2018, while in his final month in office, January 2021, inflation clocked in at 1.4 percent.

Under Biden, inflation has climbed steadily, soaring 9.1 percent year-over-year in June 2022, a figure not seen in more than 40 years.

‘War on American Energy’

Soaring energy prices have been one of the key contributing factors to inflation, accounting for around half of the headline inflation figure, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

In his criticism of Biden’s policies, Trump singled out what he called “Biden’s war on American energy” and blamed it for pushing up gasoline prices.

Since taking office, Biden has taken a number of executive actions targeting the oil industry, including rescinding the Keystone XL pipeline permit, halting new oil and gas drilling leases on federal lands and waters, and ending fossil fuel subsidies by some agencies.

The price of gasoline is around double what it was when Biden took office, with the president blaming various factors, including a lack of refining capacity, the war in Ukraine, and corporate greed.

In a bid to lower prices at the pump, Biden ordered the release of oil reserves from the national strategic reserve, called on U.S. refineries to boost output, and pushed OPEC to pump more crude.

In his speech, Trump said this amounted to “begging” other countries to pump more oil instead of trying to ramp up domestic production.

“We have more liquid gold under our feet than any other country in the world. We are a nation that is consumed by the radical left’s Green New Deal, yet everyone knows that the Green New Deal will lead to our destruction.”

“Just two years ago, we were energy-independent. We were even energy-dominant. The United States is now a beggar for energy

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

With an expected GOP takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives following November’s midterm elections, Republicans in the chamber are poised to launch a slew of investigations aimed at dialing up the pressure on the Biden administration over a range of issues—from border security to Hunter Biden to the origins of the pandemic.

Domestic concerns faced by everyday Americans—most notably a historic inflation rate—will be key priorities, according to Chair of the House Republican Conference Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.).

House Republicans will take the administration to task on alleged “policy failures that have created an inflation crisis, energy crisis, border crisis, and crime crisis impacting every American family,” Stefanik told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

Big Tech’s censorship of conservative voices will also be scrutinized, she added.

On the foreign policy front, the Biden administration’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Chinese Communist Party’s influence in the United States and abroad, and U.S. strategy toward Iran are set to come under focus.

Republicans are already laying the groundwork to take on “an aggressive oversight role” next year by issuing preservation notices and document requests so a potential GOP majority “will be ready to hold the Biden administration accountable from day one,” a House GOP leadership aide told The Epoch Times in an email.

Oversight Committee

Many of the inquiries are expected to be spearheaded by the powerful House Committee on Oversight and Reform, the chamber’s main investigative panel that has broad authority to scrutinize various facets of the administration.

The committee’s ranking member James Comer (R-Ky.), who is poised to take the chair should the Republicans flip the House, foreshadowed an ambitious agenda by a GOP-led panel.

“[W]e will return the House Oversight and Reform Committee to its core mission of rooting out waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in the federal government and holding the Executive Branch accountable,” Comer told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement.

Another committee member Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) had a clear message for the Biden administration via email to The Epoch Times: “Their days of corruption, fraud, and abuse will no longer be met with blind eyes.”

Hunter Biden

Chief among a GOP-led House Oversight Committee’s priorities is an investigation into Hunter Biden and his foreign business dealings.

For more than two years, the president’s son has been at the center of growing controversy over his overseas business activities, including in Ukraine, Russia, and China, conducted while Biden was vice president in the Obama administration.

Hunter is currently the subject of a federal investigation being run out of Delaware and, according to a recent CNN report citing unnamed sources, it is “nearing a critical juncture.”

Hunter has previously denied wrongdoing, and the elder Biden has maintained that he has never discussed Hunter’s business activities with his son.

The president’s son’s extensive financial dealings with foreign individuals and businesses, raise concerns about conflicts of interests, illegal lobbying, and whether his ties influenced U.S. foreign policy during the Obama administration, critics say.

Republicans have honed in on Hunter’s work for Ukrainian gas firm Burisma, while his father was the Obama administration’s point-man on Ukraine, and Hunter’s dealings with several Chinese companies and businessmen with links to the Chinese Communist Party.

“We will continue to conduct oversight of Hunter Biden and the Biden Family’s pattern of peddling access to the highest levels of government to enrich themselves,” Comer said.

“They have racked up over 150 suspicious activity reports for their foreign business deals, which is a national security threat,” the lawmaker said, referring to a CBS report saying that U.S. banks had flagged more than 150 financial transactions involving Hunter or the president’s brother, James, for further review by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Some of the transactions involved large wire transfers, the report said.

“We need to know if resident Biden benefited financially from these deals and if he is beholden to the interests of foreign adversaries,” Comer said.

COVID-19 Origins

The ranking member highlighted that the committee would continue to investigate the origins of COVID-19, focusing on the possibility that the pandemic was the result of a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China.

“Growing evidence shows COVID-19 likely originated from the Wuhan Lab and the Communist Party of China covered it up,” Comer said.

An array of circumstantial evidence has prompted some officials and scientists to point to the WIV as the most likely source of the pandemic. These include the WIV’s gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, reports that staff members became sick with symptoms consistent with both seasonal flu and COVID-19 in the fall of 2019, before the Chinese regime acknowledged the outbreak, and that a WIV public database of 22,000 samples and viral sequences was taken offline in September 2019 before the onset of the pandemic.

The Chinese regime’s persistent refusal to allow outside access to the lab and its data has made it nearly impossible to fully investigate the lab leak theory.

Domestically, the potential role of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in aiding WIV’s activities has been viewed with particular alarm by Republicans, who are looking to intensify the inquiry. The NIH has previously funded WIV via New York-based health nonprofit EcoHealth, including one grant that amounted to what experts have described as gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.

“We will seek to hold U.S. government officials accountable for any wrongdoing, and ensure Americans’ tax dollars aren’t being used on risky research at unsecure labs,” Comer said.

Other Key Priorities

The ongoing struggle by the administration to control the flow of illegal immigration at the U.S.–Mexico border is set to become another focal point for Republicans serving on the House Oversight Committee, and other panels.

“We will also continue our oversight of Biden’s border crisis that has led to historic illegal immigration, a surge of deadly drugs pouring across the border, and mismanagement of taxpayer dollars,” Comer said.

With a GOP-led House Energy and Commerce Committee, Biden’s energy policies amid a deepening global squeeze on oil and gas are expected to come under close scrutiny.

“We will build on our robust oversight over how the administration is censoring conservative speech, shutting down American energy and increasing gas prices, abusing its public health emergency powers, [and] colluding with political allies like teacher’s unions,” a spokesperson for Energy and Commerce Republicans told The Epoch Times in an email.

Meanwhile, a Republican-led House Financial Services Committee would focus on probing regulatory agencies’ alleged efforts to impose a “far-left agenda” on the U.S. financial system, as well as the Biden administration’s implementation of the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus package known as the American Rescue Plan, said Laura Peavey, communications director for the House Financial Services GOP, in an email to The Epoch Times.

The Epoch Times has reached out to the White House for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) announced on July 27 that he has reached a deal with Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on energy, taxes, and health care to advance what appears to be a revised, alternate version to the Build Back Better (BBB) bill.

The new spending package (pdf), now dubbed the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022,” will “address record inflation by paying down our national debt, lowering energy costs, and lowering healthcare costs,” Manchin said in a lengthy statement.

“For too long, the reconciliation debate in Washington has been defined by how it can help advance Democrats political agenda called Build Back Better. Build Back Better is dead, and instead, we have the opportunity to make our country stronger by bringing Americans together,” he added.

Manchin, a crucial swing vote in the 50–50 split Senate, had for months refused to support the BBB pushed by fellow Democrats that at one point had asked for over $3 trillion in funding. In mid-July, he reportedly killed any hope for a scaled down version of the BBB, telling party leadership he would not support new climate spending or raise taxes from their post-2017 levels.

“The revised legislative text will be submitted to the Parliamentarian for review this evening and the full Senate will consider it next week,” Manchin and Schumer said in a joint statement on July 27.

Schumer seeks to pass the measure through a procedural tool that allows a bill related to taxes, spending, and debt to be passed in the chamber by a simple 51-vote majority rather than having to pass the 60 vote filibuster threshold. The process also limits debate on the bill to 20 hours. That could allow the bill to be passed with only Democratic votes, if necessary—if every Democrat is on board.

Hours after Manchin announced the deal, a spokesperson for Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), a moderate Democrat, told news outlets that her office does not have a comment on the proposed legislation and that she will need to review the text.

Bill Claims to Reduce Federal Deficits by $300 Billion

The two senators said the bill “will make a historic down payment on deficit reduction to fight inflation, invest in domestic energy production and manufacturing, and reduce carbon emissions by roughly 40 percent by 2030.” It will also allow Medicare to negotiate for prescription drugs and lower health care costs for Americans, they added.

A one-page summary (pdf) from Manchin’s office show that the deal will see a total of $433 billion in investments: about $369.75 billion in energy security and climate change programs over 10 years, and $64 billion to extend the expanded Affordable Care Act program for federal subsidies of health insurance, for three years through 2025.

The deal seeks to generate an estimated $739 billion in new revenue over the next 10 years. A large portion of the money—an estimated $313 billion—is expected to be generated by increasing the corporate minimum tax to 15 percent. The remaining amounts include $288 billion in prescription drug pricing reform; $124 billion in Internal Revenue Service tax enforcement; and $14 billion in closing the carried interest loophole.

That would leave over $300 billion to reduce federal deficits over the next 10 years to fight inflation, according to the Democratic senators. The government is projected to rack up trillions in cumulative deficits over the next 10 years.

“It is past time for America to begin paying down our $30 trillion national debt and get serious about the record inflation that is crushing the wages of American workers,” Manchin said in his statement. He said the proposed legislation “would dedicate hundreds of billions of dollars to deficit reduction by adopting a tax policy that protects small businesses and working-class Americans while ensuring that large corporations and the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share in taxes.”

Resident Joe Biden said in a statement that the proposed legislation “will reduce the deficit beyond the record setting $1.7 trillion in deficit reduction we have already achieved this year, which will help fight inflation as well.”

Read More

House Passes $1.5 Trillion Spending Bill With $13.6 Billion for Ukraine

Congress Clears Bill to Raise Debt Ceiling by $2.5 Trillion, in Time for Treasury Dept. Deadline

“And we will pay for all of this by requiring big corporations to pay their fair share of taxes, with no tax increases at all for families making under $400,000 a year,” he said. “This is the action the American people have been waiting for.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) criticized the measure on Twitter.

“Democrats have already crushed American families with historic inflation. Now they want to pile on giant tax hikes that will hammer workers and kill many thousands of American jobs,” he wrote. “First they killed your family’s budget. Now they want to kill your job too.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The Biden administration has sold nearly 6 million barrels of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve to an entity tied to the Chinese Communist Party, records show.

From September 2021 to July, the Department of Energy (DOE) has awarded three crude oil contracts with a combined value of roughly $464 million to Unipec America, the U.S. trading arm of Chinese state-owned oil company Sinopec, according to a review by The Epoch Times of the DOE documents. A Chinese firm with ties to Hunter Biden had invested in the national oil giant.

The sale would tap 5.9 million barrels in total from the strategic reserve (SPR) to export to the Chinese firm. The latest contract, revealed on July 10, was for 950,000 barrels sold for around $113.5 million.

The two most recent sales to Unipec came out of an emergency drawdown of the U.S. oil stockpile, initiated under resident Joe Biden on March 31 in what he said would offset the loss of Russian oil in global markets and tame rising fuel costs at home.

The Unipec contracts have been subject to heavy criticism in recent weeks, especially because of the firm’s connections to the president’s son. With Americans nationwide still reeling from elevated gas prices, the selling of oil reserves to foreign adversaries such as China is at odds with U.S. energy and security needs, Republican lawmakers and analysts have said.

“Biden is draining our strategic reserves at an unprecedented rate. This is an abuse of the SPR, far beyond its intended purpose. Sending U.S. petroleum reserves to foreign adversaries is wrong, and it undermines our national security,” Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) told The Epoch Times.

What the United States should do, he says, is to “unleash American energy production and ensure that our strategic reserves are stocked and able to meet the demands of a national emergency.”

Unipec’s Bids

The oil auction is price-competitive, meaning contracts are awarded to the highest bidder. Unipec, a consistent participant in previous U.S. crude oil sales, secured 1.9 million barrels over the past three months through two contracts it won on April 21 and July 10.

The DOE also sold 4 million barrels to Unipec last fall during a congressionally mandated sale.

Sales to Unipec appear to fall in the lower price range among the successful buyers, a review of DOE contracts by The Epoch Times shows. For the 2021 contract, Unipec paid about $63 for each barrel, about $7 lower than the trading price at the time, and more than $2 short of the highest price from other buyers in the sale.

The April and July purchases cost Unipec $103.30 and $119.50 per barrel, respectively. The highest prices offered, by comparison, were $111.25 and $125.10.

Unprecedented Drawdown

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the world’s largest supply of emergency crude oil, with four storage sites in Texas and Louisiana designed to alleviate significant oil supply shortages in times of major geopolitical events or natural disasters.

The amount of oil in the SPR has seen a steep decline over the past year, more notably since Biden, blaming Russia’s Ukraine war for the “price hike at the pump,” in March ordered a withdrawal at a rate of 1 million barrels per day for six months to curb gas prices. The planned sale of about 180 million barrels marked the biggest drawdown in the reserve’s more-than-four-decade history and is set to cut the U.S. backup oil supply by about a third.

The inventory stood at 474.5 million barrels as of July 22, marking a 34 percent drop from its peak of 726.6 million, and some 90 million lower than the level in late March.

The DOE on May 5 announced a “long-term buyback plan” to repurchase 60 million barrels in fall through “a competitive, fixed-price bid process.” The delivery date, the DOE said, will take place “in future years when prices are anticipated to be significantly lower,” likely after fiscal year 2023. More buybacks would follow after this first tranche of purchases, it added.

But releasing oil reserves at this magnitude carries risks, according to Abhi Rajendran and Robert Johnston, two research scholars on global energy policy at Columbia University. For one, there’s no guarantee that oil prices will fall when the government moves to refill the stock. Further, the diminution of oil supply may cause the market to price in a greater premium for wars and other supply shocks, resulting in higher prices for longer, they said in a Q&A on April 1.

Scrutiny

On Capitol Hill, Republican lawmakers have been watching the oil sales with growing alarm. A total of 206 House Republicans voted on July 20 in support of a legislative amendment aimed at preventing the Biden administration from exporting petroleum to entities with Chinese Communist Party ties.

“It does not make sense that we are using our already depleted energy supplies to help China build up their own strategic reserves,” Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) said in a speech rallying support for the proposal.

China is the world’s largest importer of oil. As the West turns away from Russian oil due to the Ukraine war, China has been quietly snapping up Russian resources at steep discounts. From March through June, it spent more than $25 billion on Russian oil, gas, and coal, nearly doubling the amount from the year-earlier period, the latest customs data show. The sales volume propelled Russia to become China’s top oil supplier for two straight months from May, displacing Saudi Arabia.

The GOP-led measure was overruled after 219 Democrats in the House unanimously voted against it.

The same day, 20 Republican members on the House Committee on Oversight and Reform wrote (pdf) to Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm requesting an immediate briefing and all documents related to the administration’s decision to sell U.S. oil reserves. They noted that Sinopec, the parent organization of Unipec, has been linked to the president’s son Hunter Biden, through the state-backed Chinese private equity firm BHR Partners, which became a stakeholder of Sinopec in 2014.

Hunter served as a founding board member of BHR from 2013 through April 2020. His firm Skaneateles also held a 10 percent stake in BHR, which his lawyer said has been divested as of November 2021. On BHR’s 2021 annual report released in June, however, Skaneateles was still listed as a shareholder.

Hunter’s lawyer hasn’t responded to The Epoch Times’ questions regarding Skaneateles.

“As if Biden couldn’t have bundled this energy crisis anymore, this latest development of sending our strategic petroleum reserves to a Chinese oil firm connected to Hunter Biden reaches a new low,” Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.), who signed on the letter, told The Epoch Times.

“For one, this administration should have never tapped into these reserves. Second, these reserves should have never left U.S. shores, and third, the U.S. shouldn’t be doing deals with firms connected to the president’s son,” he said, adding that the Biden family’s “continued compromising actions require strict oversight from Congress.”

Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the ranking GOP member of the House Oversight Committee who spearheaded the letter, noted that previous inquiries by Republicans to the DOE about the oil sale had gone unanswered.

“Under no circumstances should the Department of Energy be making decisions which financially benefit Hunter Biden or any of the Biden family’s business partners,” he told The Epoch Times.

“If Administration officials continue to ignore meaningful oversight,” Republicans will “use the gavel to get answers in January,” Comer said, in reference to the expected swing to a Republican majority in the House in the November midterm elections, which would hand GOP lawmakers subpoena power as chairpersons of the chamber’s various committees.

“The American people need answers to determine if this is another attempt by the Biden family to peddle access to the highest levels of government to enrich themselves.”

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), who also backed the Oversight Committee request, said the sale demonstrates the current administration’s “rank incompetence.”

“The Biden White House obviously didn’t see a problem with loading millions of barrels from our strategic reserves onto tankers bound for foreign countries, which likely explains why they don’t see a problem selling our emergency crude oil to a Chinese gas company with ties to Hunter Biden’s investment firm,” he told The Epoch Times.

White House Pushes Back

Ian Sams, a special assistant to Biden and spokesman for the White House Counsel’s Office, responded to the Republican claims on July 22, calling them “ridiculous and false.”

The DOE is “required by law to sell it ‘in a competitive auction to the highest bidder,’ regardless of whether that bidder is a foreign company,” he told Fox News, noting that the Trump administration, in 2017, also sold a half-million barrels of crude oil from the reserve to China’s state-run PetroChina International through the same “competitive bidding process.”

Sams also stressed that Biden “had no personal involvement in this process whatsoever.”

But Sams’s statement may not have presented the full picture, according to Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of Power the Future, a nonprofit group advocating for energy workers.

“The White House has pushed back as saying we have sold in the past to the communist Chinese. And that is true. We sold when our SPR was nearly full and oil was not at record highest and the world was at relative peace,” he told The Epoch Times. “Times change, and thanks to this president, they have not just changed but become worse, and our policies must change with them.”

DOE officials didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times about its buyback plan and Republican lawmakers’ concerns.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

The U.S. economy is declining at a pace not seen since the 2008–09 financial crisis, said Chris Williamson, chief business economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence, citing the latest round of Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) readings.

The headline Flash U.S. PMI Composite Output Index fell into contraction territory at 47.5 in July, from 52.3 a month ago, indicating a significant decline in private sector output. The pace of decline was the fastest since the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2020, as both manufacturers and service providers reported weak demand conditions.

The services PMI fell short of the market estimate, with a reading of 47, down from 52.7. That was the biggest decline since May 2020, driven by a decrease in new exports, a drop in job creation, a jump in prices, and business confidence being at its lowest level since September 2020.

The manufacturing PMI eased to a two-year low of 52.3 in July, from 52.7 in June—anything above 50 indicates expansion. The market had penciled in a reading of 52.

This month, production levels were flat, new orders fell, employment growth moderated, and business sentiment plummeted to its lowest level since October 2020. More firms noted that they plan to cut personnel and slash costs.

PMIs are crucial economic indicators since they can suggest a general direction of trends in the manufacturing and service sectors.

“The U.S. #economy is contracting at a rate not seen since the global financial crisis in 2009 (excluding the initial pandemic lockdown), as the flash #PMI covering output of manufacturing and services fell sharply in July,” Williamson posted on Twitter.

Worse to Come?

Williamson noted that multiple forward-looking indicators, including the orders-inventory ratio signal, suggest that “worse is to come for U.S. manufacturing in August.”

“This means the #FOMC is hiking interest rates at a time when the U.S. economy is already showing severe signs of stress & recession risks have risen,” he wrote.

This week, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) will be holding its two-day July policy meeting. The market widely expects the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates by 75 basis points for the second consecutive month, although there’s a 20 percent chance of a 100-basis-point increase amid skyrocketing inflation, according to the CME FedWatch Tool.

While some market analysts think that this will help trim headline inflation levels, they also fear that these efforts might facilitate a recession.

“As for next year, we strongly suspect rate cuts will be the key theme,” ING economists wrote in a research note. “By delaying their response to high inflation and now having to move policy faster and deeper into restrictive territory, there is clearly the fear of a recession. At the same time, we think inflation could fall sharply from March next year onwards.”

Speaking in an interview with CNBC, economist Mohamed El-Erian said inflation has likely peaked, but it might be at the expense of the economy.

“I think inflation has peaked in the U.S., at least for the next three to four months. We’ve got to see how sticky some elements are,” he said on July 22. “But the problem is not that inflation is going to come down—that’s a really good thing. The problem is that inflation is going to come down with growth probably going into a recession, and that’s not good news.”

Concerns over an economic downturn have dramatically increased over the past month.

In addition to a higher-than-expected 9.1 percent consumer price index (CPI) in June, a broad array of metrics released this month have indicated a slowing economy

Personal spending eased to a 0.2 percent increase month-over-month, while personal income was unchanged at a 0.5 percent increase. The Institute of Supply Management’s (ISM) Manufacturing PMI fell to 53, construction spending tumbled by 0.1 percent, industrial production fell by 0.2 percent, and manufacturing output dropped by 0.5 percent.

Sentiments and expectations have also deteriorated among companies and consumers.

The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) Optimism Index slipped to 89.5 (100 was sentiment in 1986), the IBD/TIPP Economic Optimism Index in the United States remained at an 11-year low, and the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index tumbled to 98.7 (100 was sentiment in 1985).

Despite the strong June jobs report, there have been signs that the labor market could be growing sluggish.

The number of Americans filing new claims for jobless benefits rose to a nine-month high of 251,000 in the week ending on July 16, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (pdf). The four-week average, which removes week-to-week volatility, has steadily climbed every week since the beginning of April.

Job openings and quits took a breather in May, while job cuts swelled in June.

Is the US in Recession?

In the meantime, all eyes will be on the second-quarter gross domestic product (GDP) report to determine if the United States has slipped into a technical recession. The market consensus is a growth rate of 0.4 percent, while the Bloomberg GDP estimate range from 55 economists is between minus 0.6 percent and 1.2 percent. But the Atlanta Fed Bank’s GDPNow model estimate shows minus 1.6 percent in the April-to-June period.

Many organizations have lowered their GDP forecasts for the next few years. S&P Global’s latest projections show zero percent in 2022, minus 0.4 percent in 2023, minus 0.2 percent in 2024, and minus 0.2 percent in 2025. The Conference Board downgraded its second-quarter expectation from 1.9 percent to 0.8 percent. For 2022, the Conference Board anticipates 1.7 percent expansion before slowing to 0.5 percent growth next year.

But until there’s considerable weakness in the labor market, the Fed’s tightening cycle will function on auto-pilot, according to Scott Anderson, chief economist at Bank of the West Economics.

“It feels a bit like one of those bad horror movies where the creepy music is already playing, but the character continues to walk into the seemingly abandoned house,” Anderson wrote in a note. “You know this isn’t going to end well though you’re not yet sure what is about to happen.”

According to the Fed’s Summary of Economic Projections that was updated from March, the median unemployment rate forecasts were raised to 3.7 percent in 2022, 3.9 percent in 2023, and 4.1 percent in 2024 (pdf).

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

President Donald Trump denounced resident Joe Biden over his handling of the inflationary wave hammering American households, telling rally-goers in Arizona that the true rate of inflation is far higher than the official rate of 9.1 percent.

Trump made the remarks at a July 22 rally in Prescott Valley, where he was stumping on behalf of former TV anchor Kari Lake in her bid to become Arizona’s next governor for the upcoming GOP primary election.

During his speech, Trump touted his own record on the economy, including high job creation and low inflation.

‘The Worst Inflation’

Trump told rally-goers that under his tenure, “We had the greatest economy in the history of the world with no inflation,” and added that “Biden created the worst inflation in 47 years.”

February 2017, the first full month of Trump in office, saw the headline Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation gauge at 2.8 percent in annual terms. While the CPI measure fluctuated during his tenure, the highest it ever reached was 2.9 percent in July 2018, while in his final month in office, January 2021, inflation clocked in at 1.4 percent.

Inflation has climbed steadily under Biden, soaring 9.1 percent year-over-year in June 2022, a figure not seen in more than 40 years.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo told CBS News’s “Face the Nation” on July 24 that inflation in the United States has “probably” peaked, while acknowledging that factors “out of our control,” such as another war or pandemic, could once again cause price growth to accelerate.

‘War on American Energy’

While Trump didn’t go into detail as to the Biden policies that he thinks have sent inflation soaring, he did single out what he called “Biden’s war on American energy.”

Soaring energy prices have been one of the key contributing factors to inflation, accounting for around half of the headline inflation figure, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Since taking office, Biden has signed a number of executive orders targeting the oil industry, such as revoking the Keystone XL pipeline permit, freezing new oil and gas drilling leases on federal lands and waters, and ending fossil fuel subsidies by certain agencies.

The price of gasoline is currently around double what it was when Biden took office, with the president variously blaming a lack of refining capacity, global supply shortfalls set against a sharp post-pandemic rebound in demand, the war in Ukraine, and corporate greed.

In a bid to lower gasoline prices, Biden has ordered the release of crude reserves from the national strategic reserve, called on U.S. refineries to boost output, and pushed OPEC to pump more oil.

In his speech in Arizona, Trump criticized Biden for “begging” other countries to pump more crude oil instead of trying to ramp up domestic oil production.

“We are a nation that is begging Venezuela and Saudi Arabia and many other countries for oil,” Trump said.

“Yet we have more liquid gold under our feet than any other country in the world. We are a nation that is consumed by the radical left’s Green New Deal, yet everyone knows that the Green New Deal will lead to our destruction.

“Just two years ago, we were energy-independent. We were even energy-dominant. The United States is now a beggar for energy.”

Inflation ‘Much, Much Higher’

Trump also alleged that the true inflation figure is far higher than is being officially reported.

“We’re at 9.1 percent, but the actual number is much, much higher than that,” Trump said, without citing where he received his data. “And it’s going higher and higher all the time. It’s costing families nearly $6,000 a year, bigger than any tax increase ever proposed.”

While the former president didn’t provide his own estimate for the true rate of inflation, an alternative CPI inflation gauge developed by economist John Williams, calculated according to the same methodology used by the U.S. government in the 1980s, puts the figure at 17.3 percent, a 75-year high.

Trump also said he believes that the country is facing a “much bigger problem than recession,” telling rally-goers that Americans now face a combination of high inflation and slow growth, known as stagflation, and that they should brace for a full-blown depression.

“Where we’re going now could be a very bad place,” he said.

“Not recession. Recession’s a nice word. We’re going to have a much bigger problem than recession. We’ll have a depression.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Declare Emergency hopes roadblocks will pressure Biden to declare a climate emergency

The climate alarmism group that blocked interstates around Washington, D.C., on Independence Day is planning to shut down city streets to pressure resident Joe Biden to declare a climate emergency.

Declare Emergency will organize roadblocks, including a conga line to disrupt traffic, and rallies at national monuments throughout the week of Oct. 1—all to put enough strain on the nation’s capital to push Biden to take executive action on climate change, group leader Donald Zepeda told the Washington Free Beacon. During the “week of arrest,” Declare Emergency aims for up to 100 protesters to be arrested for “nonviolent civil disobedience action.”

“What people are interested in and concerned about is that sacrifice element,” Zepeda said, “so I don’t think we’re going to have actions without arrests.”

Like Declare Emergency, which believes there are fewer than 1,000 days left to avert a climate catastrophe, left-wing activists in the United States and Europe are intensifying their protest strategies. Declare Emergency protesters on July 4 blocked all lanes of Interstate 495 in Montgomery County, Md., for more than an hour, leading to 14 arrests. Italian environmental activists on Friday glued themselves to Botticelli’s Primavera painting in Florence, the latest in a series of stunts involving artwork in European art museums.

The climate group Now or Never, meanwhile, is planning to stop the July 28 Congressional Baseball Game to pressure Democratic lawmakers to pass climate legislation. Seventeen congressional staffers on Monday staged a sit-in in Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D., N.Y.) office to demand he reopen negotiations on climate legislation, which has failed to garner support from Republicans and some Democratic lawmakers.

Biden last week announced several green energy initiatives, including new funding for cooling centers and offshore wind projects in the oil-rich Gulf of Mexico, but stopped short of declaring an emergency. Environmental activists are demanding an emergency declaration because it would allow the president to redirect military funding to green-energy construction and end fossil fuel exports, among other measures. Declare Emergency said anything short of these actions are “band-aid solutions” that will result in the deaths of “billions” of people.

“While a step in the right direction, resident Biden’s speech fell short of declaring a climate emergency,” group member Michelle Wehner said in a news release. “The efforts he named for adaptation and a clean energy transition are wholly inadequate to stopping the climate crisis. The result will be billions of people left behind.”

Since assuming office, Biden has taken several actions to reduce U.S. energy production, including bans on oil and natural gas leases on federal land. The president also revoked the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have transported hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil from Canada to the United States. Still, Declare Emergency believes Biden has failed to live up to his campaign promise of prioritizing climate change.

“The Democrats are all about this as the biggest issue of our lifetime, and then they do nothing,” said Paul Severance, a Declare Emergency mobilizer. “That’s soft denial. If we don’t all get in this, and get in this fully, we are not going to survive.”

Declare Emergency has organized several “action periods” in the nation’s capital since Biden’s inauguration, aiming for each protest to gain more attention than the last. Between July 1 and 6, the group blocked roads and rallied at the Lincoln Memorial and the White House. It is preparing for the October protests by mobilizing supporters through biweekly meetings, leaflet distribution, and telephone outreach, according to a meeting recording obtained by the Free Beacon. Zepeda expects the October demonstration to be “better” and “bigger” than July’s.

The Washington Monument and the American Petroleum Institute headquarters are under consideration for rallies in October, Zepeda said. Declare Emergency is willing to do “whatever is nonviolently necessary” to get Biden to “begin a full-scale World War II-like mobilization effort” and stop climate change, according to the group’s website.

“Change needs to come very quickly and we don’t have a lot of time,” Zepeda said. “We need to really front load a lot of the changes so that way, we save as many lives as we can.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

In the latest Democrat acknowledgment of America’s cost-of-living squeeze, House Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told Fox News that red-hot inflation is a “huge problem” for households.

Hoyer made the remarks in an interview on Fox News’ “Your World” program that aired on July 20.

“Inflation is a huge problem. It’s a huge problem for Americans. Supply shortages—particularly in grocery stores—a huge problem for Americans. We need to deal with that,” the Democrat leader said.

The remarks follow a recent admission by White House economic adviser Jared Bernstein that inflation in the United States is “unacceptably high,” although there’s some improvement in areas like gas prices, which Bernstein said were “moving in the right direction.”

After hitting a record-high of more than $5 a gallon last month, gasoline prices have trended downward, with the automotive association AAA reporting that, on July 21, the national average was $4.44 per gallon.

Hoyer insisted that the Biden administration was working to tame soaring inflation, touting such measures as the recently passed Lower Food and Fuel Costs Act, which Washington-based think tank R Street Institute panned as exacerbating “the very problems it claims to solve,” while also adding $700 million of public debt.

Rural Households Hit Harder by Inflation

The latest inflation print came in at a multi-decade high of 9.1 percent in annual terms, with food up 10.4 percent and energy a whopping 41.6 percent.

While price inflation affects all American consumers, recent studies from Iowa State University and the New York Federal Reserve Bank showed that different spending patterns among different demographics means that the inflationary wave has had a disproportionate impact.

Rural households, for example, have been hit harder by soaring inflation, with the Iowa State University study showing that rural discretionary incomes have plunged by 50 percent since 2020, with most of those losses taking place in the past 12 months.

The discretionary incomes of urban households, by contrast, saw a far more modest drop of 13 percent over the same period.

Black and Hispanic households tend to spend more of their income on transportation, with the New York Fed estimating that blacks faced an inflation rate 0.6 percentage points higher than the headline rate, while for Hispanics this was 0.6 percentage points higher.

bell&email=walkerboh2112%40msn.com

Inflation for Asian American households was 0.5 percentage points lower, while the rate faced by whites was about the same as the headline 9.1 percent figure.

Inflation Keeping Gen Z Living With Parents

The inflationary squeeze also has hampered the ability of the Gen Z cohort to move out and live independently.

A recent survey conducted by Qualtrics on behalf of Credit Karma showed that 29 percent of Gen Z respondents in the 18–25 age range were living with their parents or other relatives and viewed the arrangement as more or less permanent.

Soaring housing costs are likely a major factor behind the high proportion of young Americans continuing to live with their parents.

The rent index in June’s inflation figure rose 0.8 percent over the month, the largest monthly increase since April 1986.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

President also announces Gulf of Mexico opened to offshore wind farms that could power 3 million homes

Resident Joe Biden on July 20 stated that “climate change is an emergency,” leaving open the possibility of additional executive actions aimed at mitigating climate-related issues after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) ended negotiations on climate and energy programs advocated by other Democrats.

“Climate change is an emergency and, in the coming weeks, I’m going to use the power I have as president to turn these words into formal official government actions through the appropriate proclamations, executive orders, and regulatory power that the president possesses,” Biden said during a brief speech that he delivered at Brayton Point Power Station, a former coal-fired power plant in Somerset, Massachusetts.

The president announced the opening of offshore areas in the Gulf of Mexico to wind power.

“These areas cover 700,000 acres and have the potential to power over 3 million homes,” an accompanying White House fact sheet read.

In addition, Biden noted that he would allocate $2.3 billion to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, for what he described as infrastructure to withstand “extreme heat, drought, flooding, hurricanes, [and] tornadoes.”

He also drew attention to $385 million in spending for the Department of Health and Human Services, largely for community cooling centers and air conditioners.

Biden spoke after White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre ruled out an immediate emergency declaration during a July 19 press conference.

“I would not plan an announcement this week on [a] national climate emergency. Everything’s on the table. It’s just not going to be this week on that decision,” she said.

“Taking action is something he will do if Congress won’t.”

Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and others also released a letter concurrent with Biden’s speech, asking the president to declare a climate emergency.

Talk of a climate emergency has met with pushback from Republicans and other skeptics of expanded government power through climate-inspired mandates.

“Biden is using climate change as another excuse for the government to insert more control into your lives,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) wrote in a July 20 post on Twitter.

“The Atlantic [magazine] freaked out in 2019 over what Trump could do if he declared a national emergency: Martial law, control internet traffic, freeze financial assets,” commentator Glenn Beck wrote on Twitter, also on July 20.

“Weird how the media is now silent about what Biden could do to ‘climate deniers’ under a climate emergency.”

In 2019, then-President Donald Trump declared a national emergency in an effort to secure additional funding for a wall along the southern border. Biden formally ended that emergency in 2021 after issuing a proclamation describing the wall as a “waste of money.”

“By declaring a national climate emergency, Biden can unlock emergency executive powers already granted by Congress to aggressively combat the crisis,” the Center for Biological Diversity wrote in a 2022 document, “The Climate President’s Emergency Powers.”

Environmentalist Bill McKibben, who advocates a climate emergency declaration, complained on his Substack on July 19 that Biden’s “ability to postpone decisions has become the stuff of Washington legend.”

McKibben claimed that Hillary Clinton would have declared a climate emergency if she had been elected president, meaning “resident Joe Biden should do it now.”

“As president, I have a responsibility to act with urgency and resolve when our nation faces clear and present danger. And that’s what climate change is about. It is literally, not figuratively, a clear and present danger,” Biden said during his July 20 speech.

He cited “more powerful and destructive hurricanes and tornadoes” as evidence of a climate crisis gripping the country.

Experts have refuted previous claims from Biden that tornadoes can be linked to man-made climate change.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has likewise pointed out that little evidence supports a significant rise in the number of Atlantic hurricanes or other tropical storms due to greenhouse gas emissions.

Yet, they concluded that “it is likely that greenhouse warming will cause hurricanes in the coming century to be more intense globally and have higher rainfall rates than present-day hurricanes.”

The former Brayton Point power plant where Biden spoke has been acquired by energy giant Avangrid, which intends to convert it to a facility for manufacturing offshore transmission cables for wind turbines.

Biden noted that the CEO of a company involved in the project, Vineyard Wind, had “joined [him] at the White House this month.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Oil prices rose on July 18 as the U.S. dollar softened and after resident Joe Biden wrapped up his trip to Saudi Arabia, failing to secure a pledge from the Middle Eastern country to boost crude output.

Brent crude futures for September settlement rose $4.53, or about 4.5 percent, to $105.70 a barrel as of 4 p.m. EDT on July 18, after a 2.1 percent gain on July 15.

U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude futures for August delivery gained $4.53, or about 4.7 percent, to $102.10 a barrel, after climbing 1.9 percent in the previous session.

Last week, both Brent and WTI posted their biggest weekly drops in about a month as recession fears dented market sentiment.

Yet, oil supplies remained tight and the U.S. dollar has eased off recent highs, with both factors offering support to crude prices.

Softer Dollar

The greenback weakened on July 18 after hitting multi-decade highs against a basket of currency peers last week. The DXY dollar index touched nearly 109 on July 14, before slipping to 107.45 by 4 p.m. EDT on July 18.

A weaker dollar tends to support oil prices and other dollar-denominated commodities as it makes them a more attractive buy for holders of other currencies.

Some analysts said that the July 19 oil rally is unlikely to last, with high inflation maintaining pressure on central banks to keep tightening even in the face of growing signals of an economic downturn.

“Bear market bounce” is how Keith McCullough, CEO of investment research firm Hedgeye, described the moves in crude, in a post on Twitter.

Buoyed by a weaker greenback, other commodities rose, including wheat and copper. A key industrial input, copper is seen by many analysts as a barometer of a recession.

“Another good example of a crashing market that’s bouncing this morning,” McCullough said of the action in the price of copper, which rose over 3 percent on Monday morning after tumbling 8.2 percent last week.

Wheat futures on the Chicago exchange rose 1.6 percent on July 18, recovering from their lowest in around five months.

Relief rallies are common in bear markets, experts say.

Biden in Saudi Arabia

The July 18 moves in the price of oil and other commodities come on the heels of Biden’s visit to Saudi Arabia, which wrapped up without a pledge for the Kingdom to boost oil supply. Biden has called on Saudi Arabia and other Gulf oil producers to ramp up oil production in a bid to cool high gasoline prices and, more broadly, inflation.

Inflation in the United States, as measured by the Consumer Price Index, accelerated in June to a fresh 40-year high of 9.1 percent.

Despite the rally in a number of commodities, they’ve trended downward in recent weeks, suggesting inflationary pressures may be easing.

Gasoline prices have dropped over the past several weeks, with GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan saying in a July 17 statement that the most common gas price in the United States was $3.99 per gallon. The median gas price stood at $4.39 a gallon nationwide, while the top 10 percent most expensive locations averaged $5.71, De Haan added.

bell&email=walkerboh2112%40msn.com

Despite no pledge from Saudi Arabia to boost output, Biden administration officials held out some hope for a little more supply-side relief.

Amos Hochstein, a senior State Department adviser for energy security, said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on July 17 that, following Biden’s trip, several Gulf oil producers would be taking “a few more steps” to boost output, though he did not say which countries and by how much.

But analysts at ING said in a note that the Biden administration’s view that producers in the Middle East would boost output seems rosy and “comments from Saudi Arabia were less optimistic.”

“The Saudis have said that any changes in output would be done within the broader OPEC+ framework, and that the group would monitor the market and respond if needed,” they wrote, adding that, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, there’s “little in the way of spare capacity.”

Markets will be watching the Aug. 3 OPEC+ meeting closely for supply signals as the cartel’s current output pact expires in September.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

An increasing number of California cities are banning the construction of new gas stations despite critics saying that stations are necessary for the vast majority of drivers and commuters.

“We didn’t know what we were doing, actually,” Petaluma Councilwoman D’Lynda Fischer told the Los Angeles Times Monday of a citywide ban on new stations. “We didn’t know we were the first in the world when we banned gas stations.”

Since that ban, four other cities in the Bay Area have done the same.  They include Rohnert Park, Sebastopol, American Canyon, and Calistoga.

And some elected officials in Los Angeles County are pushing to bar the construction of gas stations in the county, which has 13 million residents.

“We are ending oil drilling in Los Angeles. We are moving to all-electric new construction. And we are building toward fossil fuel free transportation. Our great and influential city, which grew up around the automobile, is the perfect place to figure out how to move off the gas-powered car,” Councilman Paul Koretz, a Democrat, told the LA Times.

Koretz, in the interview, claimed that a ban would be a step toward Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal to end the sale of gas-powered vehicles in California by 2035.

“Given Gov. Newsom’s timeline to end the sale of gas vehicles by 2035, gas stations are a dying business,” Koretz said.

But Kevin Slagle, a spokesperson for Western States Petroleum Association, told the paper that the ban will likely have “unintended consequences.” Bans on gas stations will only make it more difficult for motorists who use gas-powered vehicles.

“Taking what we’re facing today—a lot of demand and not a lot of supply—if you start taking stations out, new and existing, if you make a commodity tougher to find, that often means higher costs,” he said.

The average price per gallon in California stands at $6.058 as of Tuesday, according to data from automotive club AAA. Mono County, which is located in the eastern Sierra Nevada mountains, has $7.11-per-gallon prices on average, the data show.

A recent survey from Consumer Reports, which said it asked around 8,000 Americans, found that 61 percent said they wouldn’t seek to own an electric vehicle because of charging logistics while 55 percent cited the number of miles a vehicle can go per charge.

Another 52 percent said that the costs of buying and maintaining an electric vehicle are cost-prohibitive. Another 46 percent of the respondents stated they have not heard of any financial incentives available for owners of electric vehicles.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

So Biden uses climate change lies to kill US oil industry- thus raising prices through roof- and then has our country buy oil from our enemies at a hyper-inflated cost. I’m sure the Russia-Ukraine war was part of the plan. Enemy #1 of the state, just like Barack Hussein Obama [US Patriot]

OPEC expects to increase oil output in 2023 by nearly 1 million barrels per day due to rising global demand.

“In 2023, expectations for healthy global economic growth amidst improvements in geopolitical developments, combined with expected improvements in the containment of COVID-19 in China, are expected to boost consumption of oil,” the organization said in its monthly report released on July 12.

Year over year, world oil demand is anticipated to rise by 2.7 million barrels per day (bpd), and overall demand is projected to reach 103 million bpd, OPEC said in its report.

Non-OPEC supply is expected to increase by 1.76 million bpd in 2023, with OPEC having to chip in an additional 940,000 barrels daily. In total, OPEC production is expected to be at 30.1 million barrels per day in 2023, up from 29.2 million barrels in 2022.

For 2022, total global oil demand is estimated to increase by 3.36 million bpd, with OPEC having to release an extra 1.1 million barrels of oil each day.

In the first quarter of 2022, OPEC was supposed to release 28.63 million bpd but could only produce 28.36 million bpd, a shortfall of 270,000 barrels. Things improved in the second quarter after OPEC produced 610,000 bpd more than expected.

In June, OPEC oil output rose by 234,000 bpd, driven by production increases in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, Iran, and Angola.

With regard to the United States, OPEC expects total oil output to rise by 700,000 bpd in 2023, a slower growth when compared to the 880,000 bdp increase estimated for 2022.

Increasing Oil Output

Resident Joe Biden is scheduled to meet with Persian Gulf leaders in Saudi Arabia this week to discuss raising oil output to ease gasoline prices. White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan stated on July 11 that OPEC members have the capacity to boost oil production.

However, some experts do not agree with such a view.

“I think that a surge in Saudi production seems unlikely. I expect some anodyne statements from Saudi Arabia about helping to balance the global oil market, meet global demand, support economic growth and stability among the import countries,” Ben Cahill, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Reuters.

On the sidelines of the G–7 summit in June, French President Emmanuel Macron was heard telling Biden about a call he had with UAE leader Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan regarding the difficulty in raising output, according to Reuters.

The UAE leader told Macron that his country was at “maximum” oil production capacity and that the Saudis are also struggling.

Reuters contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

As the Biden administration moves on from hectoring gas station owners to cut prices and returns to begging the Saudi government to pump more oil, there’s a case in Alaska that shows how hard it can be to develop new oil fields on federally-owned land.

– Sponsored –

With Your Help, We’ll TAKE BACK President Trump’s Majority in 2022!

As The Wall Street Journal reports, ConocoPhillips has been trying to develop a new project on federal land in the Alaskan Arctic called “Willow.” The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) wants to shrink the project’s size, but still allow it to proceed.

A big reason BLM is making the project smaller: a court ruling that said the government “failed to properly assess the project’s impact on climate change and its potential harm to polar bears.”

There are more such legal challenges either underway, or in the making:

A coalition of environmental groups…sued the Biden administration in an effort to stop more than 3,500 permit applications from energy companies to drill for oil and gas on federal lands.

The groups argued the administration hasn’t considered the damage that climate-changing carbon dioxide emissions from drilling does to endangered species, and that permit approvals in Wyoming and New Mexico violated federal laws including the Endangered Species Act.

The groups said burning fossil fuels from drilling is heating the planet and damaging imperiled species like Hawaiian songbirds, desert fish, ice seals and polar bears. The administration’s approved permits, they said, will release up to 600 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions.

The lawsuit is the latest attempt by environmentalists to pressure the administration to halt new drilling permits. Earlier in his term, Biden sought to commit to his campaign promise to suspend new drilling on federal lands, but was thwarted after legal challenges from GOP-led states and the oil industry.  

While the outcome of such legal challenges is unclear, one thing is certain: they will delay any production on federal lands for years, if not decades.

All the more reason to look on with wonder at the U.S. shale revolution, which made the U.S. a net exporter of fossil fuels in a few short years. A big reason for that success? “Shale gas development in the United States has taken place primarily on private land.”

READ NEXT: Cross-Dressing Biden Energy Official Once Defended Website Pimping Young Boys for Sex >>

SOURCE: American Liberty News

As Biden depletes US oil reserve, China amasses huge stockpile

Resident Joe Biden’s decision to deplete America’s oil reserves is helping a top adversary—China, which has built up its own stockpile while taking advantage of Biden’s firesale.

Biden’s Department of Energy in April sold roughly one million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve barrels to Unipec, the trading arm of the China Petrochemical Corporation, which is wholly owned by the Chinese government. That decision came just two months after Unipec launched an “unusual buying spree” aimed at boosting China’s own oil reserves.

The communist nation’s strategy was clearly successful—from mid-March to mid-May, China increased its oil reserves from 869 million barrels to 926 million barrels, according to Bloomberg. America’s oil reserves, meanwhile, are in freefall under Biden. The Democrat inherited 638 million barrels of reserve oil; that number is set to drop to 384.6 million barrels, the lowest level since 1984.

China’s newfound oil reserve advantage poses a serious national security threat, Republican lawmakers told the Washington Free Beacon. As war rages on in Ukraine, China has strengthened its energy relationship with Russia—in May, for example, Beijing entered discussions with Moscow to buy discounted Russian oil to further fill its reserves. For Rep. Mike Waltz (R., Fla.), that development stresses the need to ramp up U.S. energy production “rather than begging foreign governments for more supply.”

“At a time when millions of Americans are suffering financially at the gas pump, Joe Biden is helping replenish our biggest adversary’s energy reserves with our own damn oil,” Waltz said. “It’s astonishing how clueless this administration is when it comes to trusting bad actors like China to help alleviate our economy. If we want to compete with China, we need to begin expanding production here at home by expanding federal drilling leases and building more pipelines.”

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R., Alaska) echoed Waltz’s remarks, calling the fall of American energy independence under Biden “national security suicide.”

“Make no mistake: The biggest fans of Biden’s radical energy policies are Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin,” Sullivan told the Free Beacon. “We are in a new era of authoritarian aggression led by the dictators in Russia and China. The Biden administration needs to wake up to the fact that this new era—and our need for oil and gas—will be with us for decades to come.”

Neither the White House nor the Department of Energy returned requests for comment. 

It’s unclear if the reserve oil Biden sold to Unipec went directly to China’s own reserves, but the sale helped China grow its stockpile regardless, Power the Future founder and executive director Daniel Turner argued. Even if Unipec released the oil it purchased from the Biden administration into the global market, Turner said, the sale gave the state-controlled company additional supply that would allow China to place oil from other sources into its reserves.

“The energy market’s uncertainty is a good reason for any country to stockpile oil in their strategic reserves, yet America is seemingly depleting its oil reserves to help China fill theirs,” Turner told the Free Beacon. “China couldn’t create a more favorable economic and national security approach to strategic oil reserves if they had created it themselves.”

The Biden administration claimed its sale of 950,000 Strategic Petroleum Reserve barrels to Unipec would “address the pain Americans are feeling at the pump” and combat “Putin’s price hike.” In the months following the sale, however, the national average for a gallon of gas surpassed $5 for the first time ever. Unipec also ramped up its shipments of Russian oil in May, giving Putin a much-needed income source as Russia’s economy slumps in the face of Western sanctions.

While the Biden administration has blamed sky-high gas prices on Russia’s war, prices at the pump were increasing long before Putin invaded Ukraine. Biden railed against the oil and gas industry on the campaign trail in 2020, pledging to “end fossil fuel.” He went on to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline and halt new gas leases on federal land during his first month in office. Those decisions have not been well received—nearly 75 percent of Americans are not satisfied with the federal government’s national energy policy, the highest level in roughly two decades, according to a January Gallup poll.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

A survey discovered that charging logistics is the primary reason why Americans aren’t buying electric vehicles.

Consumer Reports, which said it surveyed around 8,000 Americans, found that 61 percent said they wouldn’t seek to own an electric vehicle because of charging logistics while 55 percent cited the number of miles a vehicle can go per charge. Another 52 percent said that the costs of buying and maintaining an electric vehicle are cost-prohibitive.

Another 46 percent of the respondents stated they have not heard of any financial incentives available for owners of electric vehicles.

“We found that 14 percent of American drivers say they would ‘definitely’ buy or lease an electric-only vehicle if they were to buy a vehicle today,” said Consumer Reports. “That’s up markedly from the 4 percent who said the same in a 2020 nationally representative survey from CR of 3,392 licensed U.S. drivers.”

According to recent figures from Kelly Blue Book, the average price of a new electric vehicle hovered at roughly $56,000. In contrast, the average price of a new compact was about $25,000 at about the same time. The average price of a new, non-electric SUV was $34,000, while the electric version was nearly $45,000.

Meanwhile, a recent report from data analysis and advisory firm J.D. Power, however, found that electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids may have more problems than internal combustion engines.

While internal combustion engine vehicles averaged 175 problems per 100 vehicles, this jumped to 239 among plug-in hybrids and 240 among electric vehicles, a June 28 press release of the J.D. Power 2022 U.S. Initial Quality Study stated. Lower scores represented higher-quality vehicles.

Tesla models, which were included in the industry calculation for the first time, averaged 226 problems per 100 vehicles, according to the report.

“Automakers continue to launch vehicles that are more and more technologically complex in an era in which there have been many shortages of critical components to support them,” David Amodeo, director of global automotive at J.D. Power, according to the press release.

Amid elevated gas prices, White House officials have continued to suggest that Americans buy an electric car as Republicans have faulted the Biden administration’s policies for the spike in prices.

In mid-June, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm suggested that Americans can deal with $5 per gallon of gasoline by ditching an internal combustion engine in favor of an electric one.

“If you filled up your EV [electric vehicle] and you filled up your gas tank with gasoline, you would save $60 per fill-up by going electric rather than using gasoline, but it’s a very compelling case,” she said in a clip circulated by Republicans on social media on June 14. “But again, we want to bring down the price at the point of purchase.”

Naveen Athrappully contributed to this report.

A left-wing group wrote that its members are now deflating the tires of vehicles in the name of combatting “climate change” around the San Francisco Bay Area, according to social media posts.

“ATTENTION – Your gas guzzler kills. We have deflated one or more of your tires. You’ll be angry, but don’t take it personally. It’s not you, it’s your car,” said a leaflet that was left behind on some targeted vehicles’ windshields, according to social media postings. The left-wing group “Tyre Extinguishers” appeared to claim responsibility.

“We did this because driving around urban areas in your massive vehicle has huge consequences for others,” the leaflet added, without elaborating on what those consequences are. “We’re taking actions into our own hands because our governments and politicians will not.”

Owners are also advised in the note they will have “no difficulty getting around without your gas guzzler, with walking, cycling, or public transport,” although it appears that the leaflet’s authors don’t have a clear understanding of public transportation in the United States as many areas lack bus, train, taxi, and metro service.

Incidents occurred in Vacaville, California, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.

A spokesperson for Tyre Extinguishers told the paper that “this is the first action in the Bay Area” and “the first of many.” On its website, the group alleged that 12 SUVs had tires deflated in Vacaville this month and called on people to avoid targeting “cars clearly used for people with disabilities.”

Lt. Katie Cardona with the Vacaville Police Department said officials received one report on July 5 of a Honda Pilot suv’s car being deflated overnight.

“We are aware that there are reports of additional tire deflations on social media, but those have not been reported to us,” Cardona told the outlet over the weekend, adding that the case is being investigated as a crime of vehicle tampering—a misdemeanor offense that carries a maximum one year in jail.

Earlier this month, the radical group wrote that it deflated the tires of 20 SUVs in Chicago, New York, and Scranton, Pennsylvania.

Deflating drivers’ tires can put the driver and occupants at serious risk of injury or death. Low tire pressure reduces the vehicle’s grip on the road and may result in a loss of control of the vehicle.

The group also noted on its website that: “Hybrids and electric cars are fair game. We cannot electrify our way out of the climate crisis – there are not enough rare earth metals to replace everyone’s car and the mining of these metals causes suffering.”

The Epoch Times has emailed Tyre Extinguishers for comment.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Authorities responded to a significant fire at the ONEOK natural gas plant close to Medford, Oklahoma, after an explosion was reported over the weekend.

The Grant County Sheriff’s Office on Saturday called on anyone who lives within a two-mile radius of the plant to evacuate Saturday afternoon. It’s not clear for how long.

“Please avoid any travel into or through Medford on U.S. Highway 81 at this time,” the sheriff’s office wrote, adding that at the time, there was an “active incident” at the ONEOK plant.

The local Deer Creek Volunteer Fire Department said that people should avoid Highway 81 because of “a major fire” at the facility.

The cause of the fire is not known and an investigation is underway.

ONEOK’s operator released a statement that said it is not aware of any injuries at its Medford plant.

“Earlier today there was an incident at ONEOK’s Medford natural gas liquids fractionation facility. All ONEOK personnel are accounted for, and we are unaware of any injuries at this time,” the statement said. “We are cooperating with local emergency responders and appreciate their quick response. Our focus continues working with emergency responders to extinguish the fire and the safety of the surrounding community and our employees.”

Medford is located more than 100 miles north of Oklahoma City. The ONEOK facility is a natural gas liquids fractionation facility.

More Fires

Days before that, an Energy Transfer natural gas transmission pipeline exploded, setting off a two-hour fire in a rural area on the west edge of Houston, according to state and local officials. The blaze was extinguished at about 12:10 p.m. CDT, according to the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates oil and natural gas drilling and energy pipelines in the state. No injuries were reported from the explosion and fire.

Local firefighters sprayed water on nearby fields until the flow of natural gas was stopped, snuffing the fire.

Several weeks ago, a Freeport LNG plant exploded in southern Texas. Later, the operator said that the facility won’t be back online for several months.

“Completion of all necessary repairs and a return to full plant operations is not expected until late 2022,” Freeport LNG said in a statement in mid-June. The facility, located in Texas’s Quintana Island, suffered an explosion in early June.

There were no injuries or deaths reported, Freeport LNG said. Fire crews extinguished the fire about 40 minutes later. It’s also not clear what sparked the explosion and fire, and the company previously said an investigation is underway.

Reuters contributed to this report.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Biden’s Energy Department said move would ‘support American consumers’ and combat ‘Putin’s price hike’

The Biden administration sold roughly one million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to a Chinese state-controlled gas giant that continues to purchase Russian oil, a move the Energy Department said would “support American consumers” and combat “Putin’s price hike.”

Biden’s Energy Department in April announced the sale of 950,000 Strategic Petroleum Reserve barrels to Unipec, the trading arm of the China Petrochemical Corporation. That company, which is commonly known as Sinopec, is wholly owned by the Chinese government. The Biden administration claimed the move would “address the pain Americans are feeling at the pump” and “help lower energy costs.” More than five million barrels of oil released from the U.S. emergency reserves, however, were sent overseas last month, according to a Wednesday Reuters report. At least one shipment of American crude went to China, the report said.

The Biden administration also claimed the Unipec sale would “support American consumers and the global economy in response to Vladimir Putin’s war of choice against Ukraine” and combat “Putin’s price hike.” But as the war rages on, Unipec has continued to purchase Russian oil. In May, for example, the company “significantly increased the number of hired tankers to ship a key crude from eastern Russia,” Bloomberg reported. That decision came roughly one month after Unipec said it would purchase “no more Russian oil going forward” once “shipments that have arrived in March and due to arrive in April” were fulfilled.

The White House did not return a request for comment. Its decision to sell barrels from the country’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve to a Chinese conglomerate comes as the American public increasingly sours on Biden’s energy policies. According to a January Gallup poll, roughly three in four Americans are not satisfied with the federal government’s national energy policy, the highest level in roughly two decades. 

Power the Future founder Daniel Turner admonished Biden for selling “raw materials to the Communist Chinese for them to use as they want.”

“We were assured Biden was releasing this oil to America so it could be refined for gasoline to drive down prices at the pump. So right off the bat, they’re just lying to the American people,” Turner told the Washington Free Beacon. “What they’re saying they did and what they did are not remotely related.”

Turner also said the decision highlights the Biden family’s “relationship with China.” Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, is tied to Sinopec. In 2015, a private equity firm he cofounded bought a $1.7 billion stake in Sinopec Marketing. Sinopec went on to enter negotiations to purchase Gazprom in March, one month after the Biden administration sanctioned the Russian gas giant.

Biden campaigned heavily against the oil and gas industry in 2020, promising to “end fossil fuel.” He went on to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline and implement a moratorium on new gas leases on federal land during his first month in office. Biden’s energy secretary, meanwhile, is working with left-wing activists who want to eliminate fossil fuels, and in late October, House Oversight and Reform Committee Democrats pushed top oil executives to produce less gas due to climate change.

Gas prices have since soared to record highs. In mid June, the national average for a gallon of gas surpassed $5 for the first time ever. Still, the White House has assured Americans that they need to pay high gas prices to support the “liberal world order.”

“What do you say to those families that say, ‘Listen, we can’t afford to pay $4.85 a gallon for months, if not years?'” CNN anchor Victor Blackwell asked Biden economic adviser Brian Deese in late June. “This is about the future of the liberal world order and we have to stand firm,” Deese responded.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

It pays to be close to the president—or at least one of his closest advisers.

That’s surely what General Motors executives were thinking in recent months when they met with resident Joe Biden’s adviser Steve Ricchetti, whose brother lobbies for the automaker.

Ricchetti met on March 8 with GM public policy chief Omar Vargas and General Counsel Craig Glidden, according to White House visitor logs released this month. The meeting came weeks after GM chief executive Mary Barra urged Biden to expand subsidies for electric vehicles and increase spending on semiconductor manufacturing. Jeff Ricchetti, the younger brother of the Biden consigliere, lobbies for GM on the same issues. The carmaker has paid Ricchetti $280,000 since hiring him on Feb. 1, 2021, according to lobbying disclosures.

Ethics experts have raised conflict of interest concerns about the Ricchetti brothers’ relationship. Richard Painter, the White House ethics lawyer under George W. Bush, told the Washington Free Beacon that Steve Ricchetti should “completely recuse himself from any part of the legislation that his brother’s firm is lobbying on.”

The White House ethics office has forced the longtime Biden adviser to recuse himself from matters involving four of his brother’s clients, GlaxoSmithKline, Vaxart, Horizon Therapeutics, and TC Energy.

Steve Ricchetti’s work on issues related to General Motors has been the subject of scrutiny before. The Washington Post reported last year that when Biden flew to Michigan to discuss plans to build electric vehicle charging stations, Ricchetti remained in Washington to negotiate the bill with Congress. The newspaper questioned whether Ricchetti’s involvement undercut Biden’s campaign pledge to “restore ethics in government.”

General Motors has secured extensive access to the Biden administration, though the meeting in March is the first time company executives are known to have met with Steve Ricchetti. Biden in November visited a GM facility in Michigan. He praised the company in January for announcing a $7 billion investment in an electric vehicle manufacturing plant that will employ 4,000 workers. The carmaker in February hired Biden’s niece, Missy Owens, to be its “Environment, Sustainability, and Governance” chief.

Jeff Ricchetti saw an influx of lobbying clients after Biden launched his presidential campaign, a trend that ethics experts have attributed to Ricchetti’s brother’s close relationship with the president. Ricchetti in early 2019 represented three companies. His firm has added 16 clients since then.

The White House, Ricchetti’s lobbying firm, and General Motors did not respond to requests for comment.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Analysts with JP Morgan Chase said the price for a barrel of oil could more than triple if Russia decides to cut its output amid record-high gas prices.

The current price for a barrel of oil stands at around $110, but that could increase to a “stratospheric” $380 per barrel if Russia acts to cut output, JP Morgan’s analysis wrote in a note, according to Bloomberg News.

“It is likely that the government could retaliate by cutting output as a way to inflict pain on the West,” the analysts wrote in what they described as a worst-case scenario. “The tightness of the global oil market is on Russia’s side.”

JP Morgan analyst Natasha Kaneva said that Russia cutting production by 3 million barrels a day would push global prices to $190 per barrel. And the worst-case scenario, she added, would be if Moscow cut 5 million barrels per day, which could send the price to $380.

Since the start of the Ukraine conflict on Feb. 24, Western nations have hit Russia with punishing sanctions. However, Russia supplies much of Europe with oil and natural gas. The United States, meanwhile, has blocked all Russian oil exports since March.

JP Morgan’s analysts added that if the West continues to target Russia’s oil industry, the Kremlin may not play along.

“The most obvious and likely risk with a price cap is that Russia might choose not to participate and instead retaliate by reducing exports,” the note said, according to Bloomberg.

Data from AAA shows that the nationwide average for a gallon of regular gas currently is hovering around $4.81 as of Sunday, a slight decline of about 10 cents from the previous week.

US Response

Last week, when asked about how long Americans should expect to pay high gas prices, President Joe Biden claimed that they will continue to be elevated as long as the conflict takes to resolve.

“As long as it takes so Russia cannot in fact defeat Ukraine and move beyond Ukraine,” Biden told reporters on June 30. “This is a critical, critical position for the world. Here we are. Why do we have NATO? I told Putin that in fact, if he were to move, we would move to strengthen NATO. We would move to strengthen NATO across the board.”

White House economic adviser Brian Deese said that Americans should pay high prices because it “is about the future of the liberal world order, and we have to stand firm.”

Biden also attempted to shift the blame to gas stations for the higher prices, writing on Twitter: “My message to the companies running gas stations and setting prices at the pump is simple: this is a time of war and global peril. Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you’re paying for the product. And do it now.”

He did not provide any examples of how gas stations could “bring down the price.” It’s also not clear if he was writing to individual gas station owners, companies, or individuals who own many franchises.

A day later, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby defended the Twitter post in a Sunday morning interview with Fox News.

“If everybody cooperates on this, we can bring the price down at least by about a dollar a gallon,” Kirby remarked, “so he’s working very, very hard to do this because he knows the impact that high gas prices have on the American household.”

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

Director of the National Economic Council Brian Deese took to CNN on Thursday to tell Americans they’re going to have to put up with high gas prices for as long as it takes to back the Ukrainian war effort.

When asked what the Biden administration had to say to families who can’t afford skyrocketing fuel costs, Deese replied, “This is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm.” He said, however, that gas prices are “unacceptably high.” His comments mirrored sentiments expressed at a recent NATO summit by resident Joe Biden, who said in a speech Americans will have to endure inflated gas prices for “as long as it takes” to resolve the conflict with Russia.

CNN: “What do you say to those families that say, ‘listen, we can’t afford to pay $4.85 a gallon for months, if not years?’”

BIDEN ADVISOR BRIAN DEESE: “This is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm.” pic.twitter.com/LWilWSo72S

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) July 1, 2022

Biden’s historically low approval ratings may be a sign his administration’s priorities are out of step with the American people’s. Domestic oil production has declined under Biden, which has been a factor in numerous gas price records being broken during the president’s tenure. On Friday, the average price for a gallon of gas in the United States was $4.84.

A majority of Americans believe the nation’s economy should be prioritized over sanctioning Russia, according to an AP-NORC poll conducted in May. Support for combating Russian aggression relative to achieving economic growth has also been declining over time.

SOURCE: The Washington Free Beacon

Amazon founder and multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos criticized the Biden administration’s messaging around gas prices and rising inflation.

On Saturday, resident Joe Biden suggested on Twitter that gas stations across the United States charge customers less for gasoline to offset historically high gas prices.

“Ouch,” Bezos wrote in response. “Inflation is far too important a problem for the White House to keep making statements like this. It’s either straight ahead misdirection or a deep misunderstanding of basic market dynamics.”

Earlier, Biden’s Twitter account wrote that he has a “message” to gas stations: “This is a time of war and global peril. Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you’re paying for the product. And do it now.”

From the Twitter post, it’s not clear how gas stations might accomplish Biden’s Twitter demand, which was praised by a Chinese Communist Party media account. Others, however, criticized the president’s post.

“You know as well as everyone that the Federal Reserve actually sets the prices—through rampant inflation,” wrote the Libertarian Party’s account. “When 40 percent of the dollars in the world was printed in one year, inflation sets in and prices skyrocket. Just yesterday you were blaming [Russia]. We see through your scam.”

Added California gubernatorial candidate Michael Shellenberger, “At a time of war, Biden could have leveled with the American people and united the country through an ‘all-of-the-above’ clean energy strategy that included oil & gas. Instead, he has repeatedly lied about the causes of the energy crisis and divided the country.”

Data released by auto club AAA on Sunday shows that the national average price for a gallon of regular gas currently stands at $4.81, down about 10 cents from a week ago. In mid-June, the average price hit $5 per gallon for the first time.

Biden and fellow Democrats have shifted from blaming Russia and its leader, Vladimir Putin, for the spike in gas prices to blaming oil companies and gas stations in recent days. The president sent a letter to the top oil companies in the United States, demanding that they bring down prices while accusing them of price-gouging.

ExxonMobil, one of the firms, fired back by suggesting that federal policies have contributed to rising prices.

“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” the oil giant wrote in a news release.

The federal government, it added, “can promote investment through clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development, such as regular and predictable lease sales, as well as streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines.”

Republicans and some analysts have said the higher prices are caused by Biden having issued a series of executive orders last year suspending new drilling leases on federal lands, fossil fuel subsidies, and killing off the Keystone pipeline.

SOURCE: The Epoch Times

New York billionaire and refiner John Catsimatidis, who owns hundreds of gas stations, blasted resident Joe Biden’s pinning the blame on high prices at the pump on gas station owners, arguing there’s only one solution for inflation—boosting production of crude.

Catsimatidis made the remarks in an interview on Fox News on June 24, after being asked to comment on Biden’s call to gas station owners to “bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you are paying for the product.”

“Do it now. Do it today. Your customers, the American people, they need relief now,” Biden said at a White House press conference on June 23, in which the president called for a federal gas tax holiday, urged oil companies to use their profits to boost refining capacity, and leaned on gas station owners to pass along lower crude oil prices by lowering prices at the pump.

‘Ridiculous to Put It on Us’

Catsimatidis reacted to Biden’s remarks by defending gas station owners, arguing that they’ve been “making the same margin that we’ve been making forever” as they have to cover payroll and pay rent, electricity bills, and other operating expenses.

While the margin gas station owners make fluctuates several cents one way or the other, Catsimatidis said it’s “ridiculous to put it on us. We’re not the ones that created the problem.”

The price of gasoline has nearly doubled since Biden took office, with the president variously blaming oil industry greed, a lack of refining capacity, global supply shortfalls set against a sharp post-pandemic rebound in demand, and the war in Ukraine.

Some experts and industry insiders have argued that the Biden administration’s anti-fossil fuel policies have discouraged companies from investing in refining capacity.

“It’s not the war in Ukraine. It’s really domestically caused constraint on the supply side,” said Ross McKitrick, a professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Ontario and expert on energy and environmental policy, in a recent interview with The Epoch Times.

“Nobody’s willing to invest in expanding refinery capacity because the outlook from everything that the government has said is you won’t get the approvals,” he added.

McKitrick’s view was echoed by Chevron CEO Mike Wirth, who said in a recent interview that he does not believe another oil refinery will be built again in the United States, arguing that government policies are the key factor.

“We’ve seen refineries closed. We’ve seen units come down. We’ve seen refineries being repurposed to become bio refineries. And we live in a world where the policy, the stated policy of the U.S. government is to reduce demand for the products that refiners produce,” Wirth said.

Still, American drivers facing pain at the pump could see some relief from economic headwinds and reduced demand, if not from gas station owners squeezing their margins or refiners finding ways to process more crude.

‘No Denying Biden Has Some Blame’

Oil prices have retreated over the past two weeks amid broad market concern over an economic slowdown as soaring inflation has pushed central banks to tighten financial conditions by hiking rates.

The drop in crude prices has led gas stations to reduce prices at the pump, with the national average for a gallon of gas landing at $4.897 on June 27, according to AAA.

Several weeks ago, that figure stood at over $5 a gallon, while a year ago, the national average for a gallon of gas was $3.095.

Some gasoline market experts, like GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan, predict further drops.

“We’re down to $4.88/gal with #gasprices down for the second straight week. A third is possible, with prices by July 4 falling to $4.75-$4.80/gal,” De Haan wrote in a recent tweet.

What’s De Haan’s take on Biden’s role in high prices at the pump?

“There’s no denying Biden has some blame for rising #gasprices, but it is far far from 100%,” he said in a tweet, while agreeing “100 percent” with a comment that pinned the blame on a massive demand disruption related to COVID-19 combined with a sluggish domestic production response driven by the desire to use profits to repair damaged balance sheets when oil prices crashed at the beginning of the pandemic.

‘Open Up the Spigots’

For his part, Catsimatidis said in the interview on Fox that there’s only one fix for the current inflationary spike—a big part of which is due to soaring energy costs.

“We have 100 years’ worth of oil,” he said. “Open up the spigots.”

“If we open up the spigots and flooded the market with oil, with crude oil, American crude oil, we bring the price of oil back” and “inflation goes away,” Catsimatidis said.

Petr Svab contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/oil-billionaire-blasts-bidens-gas-price-blame-game-says-only-one-thing-will-fix-inflation_4560993.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-06-28&utm_medium=email&est=3%2FzcSKWPOY4rRNOP8hGJKXoA3vkP8asu0EcKoYlTK3zv%2BlyK%2BXvRXLgydkJeJZDyfw%3D%3D

The lessons for America from Germany’s ‘Energiewende’

American Founding Father Benjamin Franklin once said that “experience is an expensive school but fools will learn in no other.” Germany’s green energy policy, launched in the year 2000, could have been a cheap lesson for America today.

The Biden administration has chosen to follow Germany, providing heavy subsidies for wind and solar, while suppressing industries that could reliably meet America’s energy needs and even reduce its carbon footprint. In January, the administration announced that it had “pulled every lever to position America to scale up clean energy … the Biden-Harris Administration has readied offshore areas to harness power from wind, approved new solar projects on public lands, and passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to build thousands of miles of transmission lines that deliver clean energy.”

On June 6, the Biden Administration invoked the Defense Production Act to increase the production of green energy and to replace the use of fossil fuels. While the legality of this move is questionable, it established the U.S. government as a major controlling party in America’s heretofore private energy industry. But like most grand government adventures into industrial policy, the push for renewables is already revealing itself to be enormously wasteful and counterproductive.

Twenty-two years ago, Germany stepped into the forefront of the green energy movement, implementing its “Energiewende,” an ambitious program of subsidies for solar panels and wind turbines, coupled with a reduction in coal, oil, and natural gas. After the 2011 nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan, Germany decided to also close its nuclear plants.

In 2000, less than 7 percent of Germany’s electricity came from so-called renewables. By 2021, that share exceeded 40 percent of the country’s electricity generation and about 20 percent of its total energy consumption, including electric vehicles (EVs).

By the end of 2021, before the Ukraine war drove prices even higher, German households paid 32 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity. The rate in France, which kept its nuclear industry intact, was 23 cents. Americans paid an average price of 11 cents for electricity at that time—about a third of what Germans paid. Twenty percent of Germans’ electric bills went to a “renewables surcharge” to subsidize wind and solar.

Germany had spent heavily to increase its renewable energy capacity, but in the case of wind and solar, capacity never delivered the promised output. According to a 2020 report from the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), Germany’s electricity output in 2000 was 54 percent of its total capacity, also known as the “capacity factor.” Unused capacity is the norm for power grids because the demand for electricity varies significantly depending on the time of day, the season, and the weather. By 2019, however, while Germany’s total electricity capacity had risen dramatically thanks to a sharp increase in renewables, its capacity factor had fallen to just 20 percent, largely because wind and solar generators were less productive than fossil fuels or nuclear.

The capacity factor for solar energy was just 10 percent because much of the country is often overcast. Wind energy was also producing well below capacity because wind turbines produced no energy on calm days and had to shut down on particularly gusty days to prevent turbine blades from being damaged. Even within those limits, the amount of energy produced by wind turbines was hugely variable depending on how hard the wind was blowing.

“It costs Germany a great deal to maintain such an excess of installed power,” the IEEE report stated. “The average cost of electricity for German households has doubled since 2000.”

A major problem with wind and solar is not only that they are unreliable, but also that they tend to generate the most power when people need it least. The peak seasons for wind generation tend to be fall and spring, but the peak demand for energy occurs in summer and winter when people need to heat or cool homes and offices.

An electricity grid must manage huge variability in demand. It must have enough capacity to cover peak demand, for example during the hottest hours of summer, but also have the flexibility to reduce power during early morning hours or springtime days when demand falls considerably. Because renewables are unpredictable in terms of how much energy they will produce, and when, they add substantial variability to the supply side of the equation as well.

“The whole idea that you would take something as complicated as an electric system, one of the most complicated things people have invented to date, and choose what to put on that system and how to run it by a popularity contest, to me that’s nuts and it’s going to end in tears,” Peter Hartley, Professor of Energy Economics at Rice University, told The Epoch Times. “Trying to run that system with politics is not a very smart thing to do.”

Germany’s energy sector had a difficult year in 2021 because the winds were calm. Even as demand surged, wind output fell by a quarter in 2021. The capacity factor for solar also fell because it was not a particularly sunny year.

After a sharp drop in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Germany’s CO2 emissions increased by 31 million tons in 2021. A significant portion of this increase was due to the failure of renewables to produce, which forced Germany to lean more heavily on fossil fuels, including coal, to keep its electric grid going. And while shutting down its own nuclear plants, Germany also bought nuclear-generated electricity from France.

The surplus periods for wind and solar brought problems as well. When the weather cooperates and wind and solar produce at peak capacity, they often generate more power than consumers want. This leaves power companies with the choice of either trying to store excess energy, which is technologically problematic, or trying to offload it at deep discounts. This left Germany in a position of importing energy when prices were high and attempting to dump excess energy on a saturated market when prices were low.

The same thing happens in the United States. In Texas, for example, wind farms have been known to even pay grid operators to take their excess output. America’s wind farms receive government subsidies based on the amount of power they sell to utilities. This means that they can pay grid operators to take their excess energy and still make a profit as long as the amount they pay is less than what the government pays them in subsidies.

This market distortion from government intervention comes at a price, however. In America, traditional energy producers that don’t get subsidies, such as natural gas, struggle to make a profit when prices are artificially depressed, and this means that more reliable energy producers are crowded out of the market and, in many cases, are shut down. Nuclear energy, a reliable, relatively inexpensive, carbon-free producer, suffers the most because of how costly it is to cycle nuclear plants up and down.

“By having governments force intermittent renewables into the system through industrial policy,” Hartley said, “You’re actually penalizing nuclear, which might be the best long-run solution.”

There is an ongoing debate about how much and how fast CO2 emissions are changing the earth’s climate. However, if reducing carbon emissions is the ultimate goal, nuclear is probably the best means of achieving it. It emits far less CO2 than renewable energies, when mining and construction are taken into account; it is scalable; it is steady, reliable, and not subject to wild variations due to the weather; and it builds energy independence.

“Two of the most successful mass displacement of fossil fuels in the world are the nuclear programs in France and Sweden,” Hartley said. Nuclear is by far the most energy-dense technology, producing 10,000 times the amount of energy per kilogram that diesel fuel produces. It also takes up less space than solar panels and requires far less mining, with all the collateral damage that comes with that.

The downsides of nuclear are well known: nuclear waste and the possibility of catastrophic accidents such as Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima. However, new innovations in nuclear energy have made the technology safer, cleaner, more flexible, and more scalable. Downsized nuclear plants called Small Modular Reactors can be built closer to industrial users, reducing the cost of building lengthy transmission networks.

While Germany appears to have closed the door on nuclear energy, the European Union is reportedly drawing up plans to reclassify natural gas and nuclear energy as “green.”

According to Jessica Johnson, communications director for Nucleareurope, “We’re starting to see member states recognize that in order to have a stable supply of low carbon electricity, nuclear needs to be part of the mix.”

Europe has set ambitious targets to “decarbonize our economy completely by 2050,” Johnson said. If nuclear energy is excluded, “we can forget those targets.”

Currently, about 25 percent of Europe’s electricity is generated by nuclear power, as well as half of Europe’s “low-carbon” electricity. Belgium is rethinking its program to phase out its nuclear plants, Johnson said. France has proposed ambitious plans for building up to six new nuclear plants, and “a couple of weeks ago, in a manifesto, the Finnish Green Party made a clear statement in support of nuclear.”

‘Carbon Debt’

Germany’s Energiewende has succeeded in reducing its national carbon footprint substantially, but it only measures emissions within its own borders. Had it measured its actual global footprint, it would have discovered that the batteries, solar panels, and EVs that it was importing were increasing CO2 emissions substantially.

EVs come with a “carbon debt.” This refers to the fact that manufacturing electric batteries, an industry projected to grow to $100 billion by 2025, is highly pollutive. A 2018 report by the International Council on Clean Transportation, a green energy advocate, noted that the production of EV batteries in China, where more than half of the world’s lithium-ion batteries are made, generated 60 percent more CO2 than building traditional gasoline-powered engines.

A report by the World Economic Forum, another renewables advocate, stated that the amount of fossil fuel required to build EVs exceeds that for gas-fired cars to such an extent that “in Germany, a mid-sized electric car must be driven for 125,000 km, on average, to break even with a diesel car [in terms of CO2 emissions], and 60,000 km compared to a petrol car. It takes nine years for an electric car to be greener than a diesel car.” EV batteries last between 10 and 20 years.

Rare earth minerals essential to the production of solar panels, wind turbines, and EV batteries include lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese, and graphite, among others. Copper is also essential for building extended power lines to connect grids to distant renewable sources, such as offshore wind farms and remote solar fields.

According to a report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), in order to meet the climate goals of the Paris Agreement, the production of these minerals would have to increase by six times over what it is today, by 2040. Furthermore, “The production of many energy transition materials is more concentrated than that of oil or natural gas … the world’s top three producing nations control over three-quarters of global output.”

The dominant players in this market are the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and China, which together control a majority of the production of many essential renewable-energy minerals. “China’s share of refining is around 35% for nickel, 50-70% for lithium and cobalt, and nearly 90% for rare earth elements,” the report states.

The mining of these materials is energy-intensive and can be devastating to local environments. Lithium, for example, comprises only about one percent of the rock from which it is mined, causing the destruction of large swathes of land in the mining process in order to extract it. Lithium and copper mining also require huge amounts of water, straining natural resources. Cobalt is often mined by child slave labor in Africa. And the refining process releases toxic heavy metals and other pollutants into the soil and water.

The installation of solar panels requires taking large plots of land and displacing wildlife. Wind turbines kill birds and bats. And the disposal of these often toxic minerals, once batteries, turbines, and solar panels reach the end of their productive use, has yet to be resolved.

‘Conditions of Genocide’

Germany struggled with the moral consequences of its Energiewende. The German parliament determined that the solar panels it was buying from China were being manufactured under “conditions of genocide” and slave labor.

“People think they’re very virtuous with these wind, solar, electric vehicles and so forth,” Hartley said. “But when you look into the background of these things, it’s pretty dicey stuff from a human rights point of view, let alone the strategic issues.”

In February, these strategic issues came to the fore when Russia invaded Ukraine, and Germany discovered how dependent it had become on unfriendly foreign suppliers. Wind and solar, upon which it had bet so heavily, proved incapable of filling the gaps its energy policies had created, and the embargo of Russian exports, together with counter-threats from Russia to cut off vital energy supplies to the West, hit Germany hard.

In May, Germany’s producer prices jumped 33.6 percent in annualized terms, the largest increase since data collection began in 1949, largely due to escalating energy costs. Energy prices shot up 87.3 percent from a year earlier; natural gas prices were up 154.8 percent.

A German federal audit in March warned of energy shortages and blackouts across Germany and power rationing between consumers and industry. With the sharp increase in the cost of inputs, the report said “there is a risk of losing Germany’s competitiveness and acceptance of the energy transition.” Last week, Germany raised its gas risk level to “alarm,” the second-highest level before “emergency.”

The German government could soon be in a position of choosing which companies are more essential than others when allocating scarce energy supplies. As is often the case with government industrial policies, the Energiewende could end up harming the industry to such an extent that the only solution would be more government intervention to save it.

Throughout Europe, some companies began shutting down in June, unable to compete with foreign firms whose energy costs were much lower. One country that is not transitioning to renewables is China.

A June Foreign Policy report stated that, while China is rapidly building out its battery manufacturing industry for export, “the country continues doubling down on coal” for its domestic energy. China expanded its coal mining operations by 300 million metric tons in 2022, “almost the annual production of the entire European Union.” The report notes that China is prioritizing energy stability and cost competitiveness, while “China’s main competitor, the United States, now experiences increasingly frequent supply disruptions as it works to transition its electric system, the world’s second largest, toward renewable energy.”

The strategic risks of Biden’s green gamble go beyond consumers and industry to include our military. Access to energy often proves to be decisive in military conflicts. One of the reasons that Germany and Japan were defeated in the Second World War was their inability to acquire fuel for their ships, planes, and tanks. Today, while America’s submarines and aircraft carriers are nuclear powered, most of our military still runs on oil derivatives; diesel for tanks and ships and jet fuel for aircraft.

China is not a significant producer of oil, which has been its strategic Achilles heel. Transitioning from fossil fuels to wind and solar, however, reverses this equation, making American industry dependent on China for the raw materials of renewable energy, when we have fossil fuels in abundance.

The lesson that the Biden administration could have learned from Germany is that wind and solar are inferior technologies that are inefficient, unreliable, polluting, and create a dangerous dependence on foreign countries that are not always your friends. Apparently, they weren’t paying attention.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/why-bidens-green-energy-policy-will-end-in-tears_4559434.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-27-1&utm_medium=email&est=PoMonR6CL3Il%2F8BHtmHUw1bHhvGxCZlVVo1calkHWiHrucg8%2FrfFztYS4Cuh49%2BtDA%3D%3D

With an open border, there’s no telling who is responsible for all of the sabotage.

Russia had the motive, the means, and perhaps the opportunity to sabotage an American liquified natural gas plant — but did it?

Tom Rogan, national security writer at the Washington Examiner, made a compelling case that it just might have.

In his report Tuesday, Rogan suggested Russian hackers may have had something to do with an explosion at the Freeport LNG plant on Quintana Island in Texas on June 8.

Amid a burgeoning energy crisis across the globe spurred on by the war between Russia and Ukraine, the disaster has taken the facility offline at least until the end of the year.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has long seen the facility, which is located in the Gulf of Mexico and just 70 miles south of Houston, as a threat to his nation’s energy industry because it gives the U.S. the ability to sell gas to European nations.

Moreover, Putin has been friendly to hackers and would certainly welcome an attack that cut America’s supply, which would, in turn, force the European Union to think twice about sanctioning Russia.

These possible motives are bolstered by evidence that there was already a plan in the works shortly after the Russia-Ukraine conflict began.

“According to two sources, around the time of Russia’s late February invasion of Ukraine, a cyber unit of Russia’s GRU military intelligence service again conducted targeting-reconnaissance operations against a major U.S. liquefied natural gas exporter, Freeport LNG,” Rogan wrote.

One of the sources also told Rogan that the FBI’s Cyber Division was investigating the incident, though the agency told him it could “neither confirm nor deny the existence of an investigation into this matter.”

Preliminary data in the days following the explosion revealed that high pressure caused a section of a transfer line to burst and allow the highly flammable vapor cloud of natural gas to escape and ignite.

“However, what was not explained is how a critical overpressure event could have occurred without safety systems kicking into action,” Rogan pointed out.

While Rogan’s unnamed LNG pipeline experts said there were issues such as corrosion that could have naturally led to the explosion, the author contended that “the FBI’s investigative involvement, the specific nature of this explosion, and the scale of damage incurred do raise major questions.”

Notably, one expert said that these pipelines that flow from the storage tank into the terminal are “undertaken from a networked control facility.”

This means Russian hackers that breached the network would have had the means and opportunity to eliminate or circumvent these safeguards through a cyberattack to initiate the disaster — and it wouldn’t be the first time.

Related:

After What Russia Just Announced About American POWs, Anything Less Than Immediate Action from Biden Is Unthinkable

It’s a well-established fact that Russian cyberattacks have created mayhem for American businesses and that the government has had difficulty doing anything to effectively stop them.

Moreover, the energy infrastructure was proven vulnerable just last year after a ransomware attack against the Colonial pipeline ended only after a $4.4 million payout was made to hackers to resume flow through America’s largest refined-oil pipeline.

And this is exactly the kind of action the Russian cyber attack unit dubbed XENOTIME would undertake.

Rogan claims the unit was likely behind the reconnaissance mission in February and previously “has utilized boutique TRITON/TRISIS malware developed by the Russian Ministry of Defense’s Central Scientific Research Institute of Chemistry and Mechanics,” according to Rogan.

“That malware is designed for the seizure of industrial control systems and the defeat of associated safety systems,” he continued. “In 2017, GCHQ (Britain’s NSA-equivalent signals intelligence service) outlined the need for network compartmentalization to protect safety systems against this malware better. In March 2022, the FBI warned that TRISIS malware remained a threat.”

An attack against the Freeport LNG plant falls in line with XENOTIME’s “modus operandi” that takes aim at these “industrial control systems and supervisory control systems in order to effect unilateral control of a network.”

It even specifically targets “safety systems,” which precisely fits the bill for a system that regulates pressure for flammable substances.

Rogan conceded that it will be difficult “attributing Russian culpability” if Freeport LNG didn’t detect the attack. “Deficient cyber forensics is an issue that afflicts many private sector organizations,” Rogan concluded.

Though not directly related, this theory about the Freeport LNG explosion plays into growing suspicions about the possibility of intentional attacks on the necessities of life.

Several food-processing plants have caught fire this year and 10,000 cattle dropped dead earlier this month in Kansas, leaving many to question whether the nation’s food supply is under attack.

Over 10,000 cattle “spontaneously” dropped dead between Kansas and Nebraska over the last 48 hours. This is not normal, folks.

— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) June 17, 2022

What the hell is going on? 25 food processing plants “caught on fire”, a liquified gas facility, “caught on fire”…Dead cattle on ranches throughout the Midwest. One ranch in Kansas has 10,000 plus dead cattle. The government’s reason is “seveer heat”,the ranchers say, “Bullshit” https://t.co/umxtFAWVOZ

— Janie Johnson – America is Exceptional (@jjauthor) June 17, 2022

Is Joe Biden also behind the 10,000 cattle dying in Kansas and the random fires at food processing plants or is he just sticking to destroying the energy sector and leaving food destruction to a friend?

— Blair Brandt (@BlairBrandt) June 15, 2022

Why are so many food processing plants randomly catching fire?

Is this going to become the new “conspiracy theory” that’ll turn out true a few months down the line?

— Lewis Brackpool (@Lewis_Brackpool) June 15, 2022

It’s undeniable that several circumstances have pushed the U.S. toward serious shortages, and it’s not unreasonable to connect the dots where they exist.

Whether these incidents are intentional or just a series of unfortunate coincidences, it’s clear that America is on the brink of disaster on many fronts.

The only question now is what, if anything, can be done to stop it.

Closing the border would be a start, though any imported terrorists/activists have already had plenty of time to arrive here, and Biden is flying them all over the country on taxpayer airfare. [US Patriot 6-24-2022]

Senator Patty Murray called a gas tax suspension a ‘bad idea.’ Now, she’s on board.

During a non-election year, Washington Democratic senator Patty Murray called a federal gas tax holiday a “bad idea” that may not lower prices at the pump. Now that she’s up for reelection, she’s on board with the plan.

Murray—who is expected to face Republican triage nurse Tiffany Smiley in November—quietly signed on to Senate Democrats’ gas tax suspension bill in late April, more than two months after it was introduced. But in 2008, when Murray was not embroiled in a reelection fight, the Democrat called the policy a “bad idea” that would “deteriorate highway funding.”

“She has a firsthand look at what’s going on with our transportation systems, our roads and our bridges, and from her perspective, this is a bad idea,” then-Murray spokeswoman Alex Glass told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer at the time. “There’s no guarantee that the plan would result in lower gas prices, but it would deteriorate highway funding.”

Murray is far from the only prominent Democrat to express past disapproval toward a gas tax suspension, which resident Joe Biden says would “bring down the price of gas and give families just a little bit of relief.” In 2008, then-senator Barack Obama—Biden’s self-described “best friend”—called the move a politically motivated “gimmick.” Many congressional Democrats agree. Oregon congressman Peter DeFazio, for example, said a gas tax holiday would not “give consumers significant relief—if any at all” and would instead “blow a $26 billion hole in the highway trust fund” and kill “tens of thousands of jobs.”

Murray has not explicitly touted her decision to sign on to Democrats’ gas tax suspension bill. Instead, she vaguely claims to be “fighting to deliver results” at the gas pump. Murray has, however, stressed the need to “modernize” Washington’s roads and fund electric vehicles. The Democrat did not return a request for comment.

Gas prices have more than doubled since Biden took office. The national average price for a gallon of gas was $2.39 in January 2021. Now, it’s $4.90, according to AAA. Should Biden convince Congress to enact a gas tax holiday, the move would hardly help American consumers. The president’s plan would suspend the 18-cent federal gas tax on each gallon of gasoline, saving the average consumer roughly $5 a month, according to GasBuddy. That move would cost roughly $3.3 billion a month, the White House claims.

Murray joined the Senate in 1993 and has not faced a competitive reelection bid in more than a decade. That could change this year as Democrats navigate a difficult political climate under Biden. Just 40 percent of Washington voters approve of the president, compared with 49 percent who disapprove. Biden won the state by nearly 20 points in 2020.

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/this-washington-dem-blasted-federal-gas-tax-holidays-until-she-was-up-for-reelection/

The Democrat-controlled Illinois legislature is requiring grocery stores and gas stations to post signs that give lawmakers credit for suspending the state’s annual gas-tax increase. In reality, lawmakers just put off the tax hike until after this year’s midterms.

The law forces grocery stores and gas stations to post signs that say the state has “suspended the inflation adjustment to the motor fuel tax through December 31, 2022″—one month after the midterm elections. “The price on this pump should reflect the suspension of the tax increase,” the signs conclude. The state will fine gas stations $500 per day for not posting the signage, the Center Square reported.

The move comes as Democrats worry that record-setting inflation will hurt their electoral chances even in solidly blue states. The Democratic Party may suffer a “greater-than-average” loss in the 2022 midterms, according to a Gallup poll released last week, as Americans consider inflation under the Biden administration to be the nation’s greatest challenge.

The reason for the signs is to make sure Illinoisans notice the legislature’s tax delay, Democratic state representative Mike Zalewski said.

“I think people that are pumping gas, and are looking at the price, their gaze will fix upon the pump and maybe they’ll read about the good things that we did,” Zalewski said at an April committee hearing.

The legislature’s delay is not a tax cut, Illinois Fuel and Retail Association CEO Josh Sharp told the Center Square, but rather a misleading appeal to voters.

“The gasoline tax in the state of Illinois is staying exactly the same on July 1 as it was the year before and now they’re going to raise it twice in 2023,” Sharp said. “They’re just putting off that tax increase until after an election.”

The Prairie State already has one of the highest gas taxes in the country, Forbes found. Multibillionaire Democratic governor J.B. Pritzker and lawmakers have doubled the tax since 2019, a move widely supported by unions.

The Illinois Fuel and Retail Association sued over the requirement, calling it forced political speech that violates the First Amendment. The association is issuing a sticker for gas stations and grocery stores that contains “the truth about gas prices lawmakers hope drivers will forget” alongside the required statement.

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/illinois-democrats-fine-gas-stations-that-dont-post-misleading-signs/

Democrats denounce fuel tax suspension

Resident Joe Biden has called on Congress to hit the brakes and provide “big help” to Americans through a federal gas tax holiday for the next three months. But some Democrats, including former president Barack Obama, have expressed the move is merely grasping for an advantage in an election year.

On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama said of the tax suspension, “We’re arguing over a gimmick that would save you half a tank of gas over the course of the entire summer so that everyone in Washington can pat themselves on the back and say they did something. Well, let me tell you, this isn’t an idea designed to get you through the summer, it’s designed to get them through an election.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) in April said gas tax holidays are “good PR,” but shared the concern that there is “no guarantee that the reduction in the federal tax would be passed on to the consumer.”

Rep. Peter DeFazio, (D., Ore.), the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, agreed.

“Suspending the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gas tax is not going to give consumers significant relief—if any at all,” DeFazio said in February, adding that the move may have negative effects. “Suspending the tax will blow a $26 billion hole in the highway trust fund this year and cause further delay in rebuilding our decrepit infrastructure and the tens of thousands of jobs that investment would have provided.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) also foresees road blocks for infrastructure projects. He said the suspension “just doesn’t make sense,” adding, “People want their bridges and their roads, and we have an infrastructure bill we just passed this summer, and they want to take that all away.”

The Free Beacon reported Monday that Biden is the least popular president in more than a century. Democrats are on the fence about his viability for a second term and bracing for a tumultuous midterm season.

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/democrats-think-bidens-gas-tax-holiday-is-a-gimmick/

Marcy Kaptur blames oil companies for ‘gouging consumers’ after taking thousands from their PACs

For years, Ohio Democratic congresswoman Marcy Kaptur had no problem taking thousands of dollars from big oil companies. But now that record-high gas prices are threatening the 39-year incumbent’s reelection chances, she says those same companies are “gouging consumers.”

Kaptur has taken nearly $18,000 from major oil and gas companies since 2013, including $12,000 from BP Corporation North America, federal campaign finance disclosures show. With Ohio experiencing record-high gas prices under resident Joe Biden, however, the Democrat is blaming the trend on BP and other “big oil” companies. “As Big Oil raises prices and gouges consumers, one CEO recently called his company a ‘cash machine,'” Kaptur said in a May tweet that included a graphic with a slash over BP’s logo. “It’s outrageous.”

Kaptur’s newfound blame game shows how Democrats are attempting to avoid political backlash over sky-high prices at the pump, which come after Kaptur’s House Democratic colleagues pressured oil executives to produce less gas. Biden—who pledged to “end fossil fuel” during his campaign—has repeatedly blamed oil companies for rising gas prices, even after energy experts debunked the claim. In April, meanwhile, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) insisted the American public is “blaming oil companies” for record-high gas prices instead of Democrats—even as poll after poll after poll finds that voters blame gas prices and surging inflation on Biden.

Power the Future executive director Daniel Turner admonished Kaptur for her recent rhetoric, noting that the oil and gas industry produces hundreds of thousands of jobs and tens of billions of dollars in revenue in Ohio.

“If the congresswoman really thinks these companies are doing damage, then why would you accept any money from them whatsoever? It’s one big joke,” Turner told the Washington Free Beacon. “And if she really wanted to see the energy industry rebound, she would distance herself from Biden’s failed energy policies, which have caused the energy crisis we’re in. Ohio is a very important and critical energy state.”

Kaptur’s campaign did not return a request for comment. 

Kaptur claims she’s worked to lower gas prices for “working people” by supporting the Consumer Fuel Price Gouging Prevention Act, a Democrat-led bill that Kaptur and her colleagues say would combat oil companies’ “greed.” But four House Democrats voted against the legislation, with Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D., Texas) arguing the bill “would not fix high gasoline prices” and “has the potential to exacerbate the supply shortage our country is facing, leading to even worse outcomes.” Former Obama administration economic adviser Jason Furman also criticized Democrats’ price gouging bills, which he called “gimmicky.”

In addition to Kaptur’s big oil campaign cash, the Democrat in December held up to $100,000 worth of stock in Nutrien, a fertilizer company that relies heavily on fossil fuels, Business Insider reported. 

Kaptur first joined Congress in 1983 and has won all but three of her reelection bids by at least 20 points. This November, however, she is set to face one of the most difficult campaigns of her career after Ohio’s redistricting process made her district considerably more red. Kaptur will face Air Force veteran J.R. Majewski in November—the Republican has raised $257,000 to Kaptur’s $974,000 as of April 13.

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/this-ohio-dem-loves-taking-big-oils-money-now-she-needs-a-high-gas-price-scapegoat/

ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods does not see oil prices cooling down over the next few years, he said while speaking at the Bloomberg Qatar Economic Forum in Doha on Tuesday.

Woods said that it would take some time for the volatility in the energy market to end. He is expecting oil markets to remain tight for the next three to five years, Reuters reported. He also called on the U.S. government to bring a more efficient investment process while pointing out that ExxonMobil is one of the few companies in America that has been actively investing in the refining sector.

Back in 2017, the firm kicked off an aggressive investment program, Woods stated. “The investment plan that we laid out five years ago is the plan we are currently on and the pipeline of the projects that we have are continuing; they are very robust,” the ExxonMobil CEO said at the event.

Woods’s statement comes after ExxonMobil recently faced criticism from resident Joe Biden, who accused the company of being too greedy amid rising oil prices and inflation.

Exxon made “more money than God this year,” the resident said on June 10, Reuters reported. He went on to blame Exxon for making money by “not producing more oil” and asked the company to start investing and “paying your taxes.”

An Exxon spokesperson pushed back at Biden’s comments, pointing out that the company lost around $20 billion in 2020 and borrowed over $30 billion to finance operations. In addition, the firm has paid $40.6 billion in taxes in 2021, which is $17.8 billion more than it paid the previous year.

Exxon also laid out measures Washington can take to address rising gas prices and high inflation.

“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” the oil giant said in a June 15 news release.

As to longer-term measures, Exxon asked the Biden administration to promote investment in the sector through a “clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development.”

This includes streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines as well as regular and predictable lease sales. Biden has been under fire for canceling the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline immediately after taking office last year.

At the Doha event, Russel Hardy, CEO of oil trader Vitol, also said that the current oil supply shortage was the result of chronic underinvestment in the industry in recent years. This will underpin tight fundamentals for years to come, he said, according to S&P Global.

“The solution is more refineries, running more crudes, to produce more products,” he said. “The world can solve the problem but things are a little bit tight at the moment”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/oil-market-could-remain-tight-for-next-5-years-exxonmobil-ceo_4548003.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-06-23&utm_medium=email&est=f%2FV%2BGU4Jux8EpE9PwrIDcgju6IdhBGiipy0jSl0gk4AzmDK%2BIt6vey4RRqdP2dAj1Q%3D%3D

Resident Joe Biden officially endorsed a suspension of federal and state taxes on gasoline and diesel Wednesday.

Speaking at the White House, Biden urged Congress to temporarily lift the 18.4-cent-a-gallon federal tax on gasoline and 24.4-cent-per-gallon levy on diesel for three months, effective until the end of September.

He also pushed states to adopt equivalent relief for motorists. State taxes on fuel are higher than the federal level. Several states, including Connecticut and New York, have paused state fuel taxes. Other jurisdictions, like California, have discussed direct relief and consumer rebates.

“We can bring down the price of gas and give families just a little bit of relief,” the president said in his prepared address.

“I fully understand that a gas tax holiday alone is not going to fix the problem, but it will provide families some immediate relief, just a little bit of breathing room as we continue working to bring down prices for the long haul.”

Biden rejected Republicans’ assertions that it is his administration’s fault for soaring energy prices. Instead, the president blamed Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine for surging oil and gas costs, referring to it again as “Putin’s price hike.”

“I said at the time, during the most serious aggression in Europe, to defend freedom was not going to go without cost for the American people,” he stated. “And we’re going to have to pay a price as well.”

The president listed the actions his administration has taken this year, including tapping into domestic reserves and encouraging nations around the world to release supplies. At a time when companies are enjoying record profits, Biden also urged the energy industry to pass on any savings to consumers.

“I’m doing my part. I want the Congress, the states, and the industry to do their part as well,” Biden said. “Bring down the price you are charging at the pump.”

When all of these actions are combined, the White House projects that prices at the pump could decline by more than $1 per gallon. This figure was calculated by considering the 18-cent federal gas tax, potential state relief that could average about 30 cents, retailers lowering prices by 25 cents, and nudging refiners to deploy their record profits to cut prices and expand capacity, which could result in about 66 cents in savings, according to a senior administration official.

“Gas prices are up almost $2 per gallon since Putin accelerated his military buildup,” the official told reporters in a conference call on Tuesday. “[T]he president promised and remains committed to doing everything he can to reduce the impact of the price hike on the American people.”

With the summer driving season getting started and the exceptional costs that families and motorists are facing right now, the suspension is meant to address this “unique moment” in America, according to the White House.

Meaningful Relief?

The announcement comes as Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm is scheduled to meet with seven of the nation’s top refiners this week to determine if there are near-term solutions that can be outlined to reduce sky-high energy prices.

Several policymakers have been concerned that imposing a federal gas tax holiday would eat into the Highway Trust Fund.

“Suspending the federal gas tax will not provide meaningful relief at the pump for American families, but it will blow a multi-billion-dollar hole in the highway trust fund,” said House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chair Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) in a statement Tuesday.

In a letter last week, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) urged Biden to avoid a federal gas tax holiday, warning about the “severe unintended consequences” for infrastructure.

“While there is undoubtedly a need to provide American consumers relief from spiking costs, there is no guarantee a gas tax suspension would reduce prices at the pump or stem the broader inflation affecting the global economy, and it may only increase oil companies’ bottom lines,” Blumenauer wrote.

The White House dismissed these arguments, telling reporters that the president’s $1.6 trillion reduction in the federal deficit means the federal government can afford to tap into the fund and potentially rely on other revenue sources to fill the hole. Biden has also previously contended that funding from last year’s infrastructure law, which included $550 billion in total new funding, could be used to plug the gap.

Others within the president’s own party have been skeptical of the policy, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), saying in April that while it is “good PR, there’s no guarantee that the saving, the reduction in the federal tax, that would be passed on to the consumer.”

Soaring Prices

Over the last year, the national average for a gallon of gasoline has soared roughly 61 percent, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA). A gallon of diesel has spiked about 80 percent since last year.

According to an analysis from Kiplinger, state gas tax holidays could have a greater impact since they are higher than the federal levy in 49 states. The financial news publisher does not anticipate much savings for the average person, while the overall tax revenue loss would be greater.

“[A] person who drives 12,000 miles a year in a car that averages 25 miles per gallon would only save $7.36 per month if the federal gas tax was suspended,” the analysis stated. “But on the other hand, the overall loss of tax revenue in the federal Highway Trust Fund would be high—estimated by the White House to be about $10 billion. That’s money that wouldn’t be available for road repairs and other needed infrastructure projects.”

In recent months, Biden has employed several measures to help curb oil and gas prices.

His administration tapped the Strategic Petroleum Reserves (SPRs) to release one million barrels per day over the next six months. He has also encouraged members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), including Saudi Arabia, to boost production. Biden also issued a waiver on an ethanol ban, temporarily authorizing the sale of gasoline with large ethanol content during the summer months to combat rising gas prices.

West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices have eased over the last week, sliding about 10 percent to around $106 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Crude prices have taken a substantial hit on growing recession fears as investors are worried that a global economic downturn amid inflation and rising interest rates could reduce consumer and industrial demand.

According to Phil Flynn, an energy market analyst at The Price Futures Group, the tax relief won’t assist in resolving the fundamental issues in the U.S. petroleum market.

“The problem in the gasoline market is not the gasoline tax but the fact that refining capacity can’t keep up with demand,” he wrote in a report. “If you lower the gasoline tax, that’s a great thing but it’s only going to cause demand to go higher as refiners are already producing gasoline at maximum capacity.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-proposes-reduced-gas-tax-to-help-with-pain-at-the-pump_4549733.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-22-1&utm_medium=email&est=v3Ka7X%2FtsIk3MT3OHXk4NCRSIQ3scXZfjUH3ifa5iCYokRpTc4m7cp7D7NMsa7dmxQ%3D%3D

During the State of the Union address to Congress this year, resident Joe Biden delivered an astoundingly Orwellian endorsement of socialism, clothed as its anti-matter counterpart.

“I’m a capitalist, but capitalism without competition isn’t capitalism,” the president declared. “It’s exploitation, and it drives up prices. When corporations don’t have to compete, their profits go up, your prices go up, and small businesses and family farmers and ranchers go under.”

Besides dubiously blaming today’s 40-year-high inflation on corporate greed (greed that, presumably, was inexplicably dormant during decades of inflation that was a fraction of today’s), Biden’s remarks shamelessly suggest that his administration’s heavy imposition of new and revived regulations fosters competition when the real mission is to level unprecedented burdens and governmental control upon businesses of all sizes.

“I’m a capitalist” belongs alongside “War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

Promising to reduce average global temperatures by a degree or two is the most fashionable excuse in America today for the state battering companies, even though Russia and China have no intention of joining in the climate crusade at the expense of their expansionist objectives, and India and other developing nations aren’t going to abandon the ongoing industrialization their people yearn for in exchange for being congratulated by international bodies for going green.

Socialists who aren’t hiding their true identity propose basically a quick and merciful death for the private sector, like now-ousted British Labor Party leader Jeremy Corbyn arguing that wasteful “fragmentation” warrants re-nationalizing privatized railroads. Or Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders proposing a 95 percent tax on companies that are more successful than he likes. But while Biden suggests he’s enabling enhanced competition, his Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, Gary Gensler, finds new forms of slow torture for this country’s employers. Gensler was heavily involved in writing one of the most onerous pieces of regulatory legislation ever—2002’s Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which costs Fortune 500 firms millions of dollars each annually on average, and has been a powerful disincentive to firms setting themselves up as publicly traded or retaining that status.

The SEC’s most prominent policy under Gensler is requiring issuers of stocks and bonds to assess and report the risks climate change poses to their investors. As Heritage Foundation senior fellow David Burton pointed out in a letter to Gensler, “Requiring all public companies to develop climate modeling expertise, the ability to make macroeconomic projections based on these models and then make firm-specific economic assessments based on these climate and economic models will be expensive, imposing costs that will amount to billions of dollars on issuers. These expenses would harm investors by reducing shareholder returns.”

Burton also points to the irony that discouraging companies from being or going public gives fat cats more wealth and the average Joe less because it “would deny to ordinary (unaccredited) investors the opportunity to invest in dynamic, high-growth, profitable companies until most of the money has already been made by affluent accredited investors” and “would further impede entrepreneurial access to public capital markets.”

According to former SEC chief economist James Overdahl, the “massive scope and prescriptive particularity” of the regulations, “centering around the inherent complexity in collecting required data and completing the calculations and analysis necessary to make the proposed disclosures” make it “difficult to recall any other instance in which the SEC has mandated disclosures where there are so many significant uncertainties, data limitations and practical difficulties in developing the required information.”

Obviously, lawsuits would become legion, as publicly traded firms are endlessly accused of failing to report climate impact to the full satisfaction of environmentalists. But companies not to be found on the stock exchange, who think themselves safe in their private status, will actually also be subject to heavy new costs, because public companies’ private partners and contractors will be required by the SEC to report their emissions, outside firms having to be turned to for certification.

In a media conference call on Thursday, U.S. Chamber Executive VP Tom Quaadman pointed out that according to the SEC itself, the climate disclosure rule in its current form “would be at least three times the implementation costs of Sarbanes-Oxley, which was the most expensive disclosure regime that we’ve gone through over the last generation,” requiring “almost 16 to 18 years to finalize all of the different Sarbanes-Oxley rules.”

Quaadman added that after “many, many meetings” with companies that are U.S. Chamber members, they told the Chamber of “implementation costs in the millions or tens of millions of dollars” for each firm—many times the SEC’s estimates.

Testifying to the Senate Banking Committee in September, Gensler claimed of climate risk information that “investors are really demanding it.” More accurately, trendy asset managers, most prominently BlackRock, the largest such firm in the world with $10 trillion under its control, demand it, the better to inflict its wishes on companies in which it invests. Blackrock boasts that it “voted against 55 directors/director-related items on climate-related issues. This is a tool available to us in virtually every market we invest in on behalf of our clients … 83% of the time our votes against directors in the FTSE [Financial Times] 350 over remuneration concerns resulted in revisions to pay policies within 12 months.”

Pointless or politicized regulations both devastate private sector productivity and kill jobs. A Conference Board survey just found that “more than 60 percent of CEOs globally say they expect a recession in their primary region of operations before the end of 2023 or earlier … Fifteen percent of CEOs say their region is already in recession.”

With a looming economic downturn—on the heels of the devastation of COVID—is this a time to be helping multi-trillion-dollar money managers bully the nation’s providers of private-sector jobs, one objective being to charm the left so they might forget about things like BlackRock’s massive military investments?

And all in the guise of a “capitalist” eager to boost competition—like a call girl attending a masquerade party costumed as a mother superior.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/killing-jobs-in-the-name-of-saving-the-planet_4543237.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-21-2&utm_medium=email&est=1FPUnM%2BaA9c7t8LBAA3fh%2FJRWso4o%2FXt%2BNLbcBOaZJJ%2Fq2aboQbufkieAEzCL2mk1A%3D%3D

Whether or not Marie Antoinette said rioting French peasants upset about the shortage of bread to feed their families should “eat cake” instead is not important. The idea that she did has been passed down, generation to generation, as the perfect illustration of how the isolated elites in a society can become hopelessly out of touch.

This is not just a problem for the rich but also for the powerful, who use their positions to grant themselves perks that alleviate the need for them to worry about the kinds of things that keep the rest of us at night.

Like whether we’re going to have enough gas in the car to get to work in the morning.

Since coming into office, the Biden Administration has been at war with the American energy sector. Following the President’s lead, they believe climate change is an existential threat to the continued well-being of mankind that can only be thwarted if Americans are forced to go green.

That’s what’s really behind the sudden, continuing rise in the price of gasoline. It’s not, as resident Joe Biden continues to assert, a transitory thing caused by Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. It is the result of calculated policy decisions intended to roll back the energy independence that became a reality by the end of the Trump Administration.

There’s nothing wrong with green energy per se. Indeed, the United States would realize considerable benefit from the ability to rely on fuel coming from renewable sources like wind and solar and to be more efficient in the generation and use of power from fossil fuels so that less of it is wasted.

All that can be achieved by market forces a lot faster and cheaper than by government mandates. The Biden Administration has chosen – regardless of the consequences – to force this upon us all, meaning that some people are now, in a period of inflation unseen for at least 40 years, to face the very real choice between putting gas in the car and food on the table.

Too many Democrats regard that as a good thing. They don’t blame the government for the problem. They blame the energy sector, which it criticizes for earning record profits because the price at the pump is up thanks to the shrinkage Biden and his cohorts have forced on the industry. The cancelation of new pipelines and oil and gas leases on federal lands are two among a handful of reasons domestic energy producers cannot respond to the increase in demand by increasing the supply to keep prices stable.

The energy markets are behaving as the President wants, given his belief, he can prioritize his strategy to increase the use of energy made from renewables and the need to bring down the price of gasoline.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre seemed badly ignorant of economic reality when she insisted during a recent press briefing that there was nothing inherently problematic with pursuing both objectives at the same time.

“What we’re trying to deal with right now is how do we lower costs for American families,” she said. “One of the things that we are seeing currently right now with oil refiners is they are using this moment,” she continued, “to actually make a profit.”

She can get away with shifting blame for a while but what does she suggest as an alternative? Does she think the energy sector should sell gasoline and other fuels at a loss? That’s a recipe for economic catastrophe, as would be the kind of nationalization of the sector that exists in so many other countries.

The problem is that Biden and Jean-Pierre and so many others are out of touch with what’s going on. The people aren’t rioting for gas yet, but it may just be a matter of time.

Consider the comments of Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow, who recently described a drive she made from her home state to Washington in an electric vehicle.

“After waiting for a long time to have enough chips in this country to finally get my electric vehicle,” the state’s senior elected Democrat said during a June 7 meeting of the Senate Finance Committee. “I got it and drove it from Michigan to here last weekend and went by every gas station and it didn’t matter how high it was.”

Stabenow doesn’t have to choose between putting food on her table and putting gas in her car. Rather than being grateful and understanding she’s insulated from reality because she enjoys elected privilege, she claims she’s mystified by the expressions of concern coming from the American people because they are routinely paying more than $100 for a full tank of gas. Wonderful.

An elected official, whose annual salary is just shy of $200,000, is driving a car that cost more than most Americans make in a year that the taxpayers probably pay for her to use, thinks high gas prices aren’t a problem because she doesn’t have to pay them anymore. That’s the kind of leadership that causes politicians to lose their heads.

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of American Liberty News.

Peter Roff can be reached at RoffColumns@gmail.com. Follow him on Twitter @TheRoffDraft.

https://www.americanliberty.news/capitol-hill/the-view-through-debbie-stabenows-windshield/proff/2022/06/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ae01&seyid=7573

Columnist Naomi Wolf, author of “The Bodies of Others: The New Authoritarians, COVID-19 and the War Against the Human,” asserts that after two years of pandemic policies, people in free societies are behaving more like those in authoritarian societies.

Wolf maintains that America is now less free, and becoming almost unrecognizable.

“A handful of bad actors” including the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Big Tech, and the World Economic Forum (WEF) used the pandemic to “exploit the crisis in such a way as to reengineer our free democratic open societies, especially in the West, especially in the United States, into a post-free society, a post-humane society,” said Wolf during a recent interview on EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders.”

Related Coverage

‘We Don’t Have America Anymore’—Dr. Naomi Wolf on CCP-Style Technocratic Authoritarianism in the US

The Biden administration in April extended the 2-year-old coronavirus public health emergency for another 90 days.

Wolf said, based on history, the ongoing lockdowns and extension of the public health emergency indicate society is in the last phase of a tyrannical takeover, because with emergency powers, laws protecting liberty can be suspended.

According to Wolf, there are 10 steps every tyrannical government has followed. We are now at step 10, said Wolf. Some of the other steps include demonizing whistleblowers and critics, calling dissent “treason,” “espionage,” or “subversion,” and controlling the media narrative.

During the last two years of lockdowns and mandates, Big Tech and the elites have profited while the average Americans have seen the American Dream slowly “closing” on them, she said.

“And so often, when a democracy is dying, or a regime is turning the screws on freedoms to create an established new form of tyranny, it happens intentionally in a very incremental way,” said Wolf. “And you really see this from 1930 to 1933 in Germany.”

She said humanity is witnessing the formation of a two-tier society of the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated, in which people who would never discriminate against others based on categories of race and sex are now discriminating against the unvaccinated.

“Suddenly, they’re happily embracing a discrimination society in which some people are cast as clean and valuable members of society and other people are ostracized and marginalized and ‘othered’ and described as sort of dirty and causing infection to others,” said Wolf.

She argues that big tech companies had an active role in creating these perceptions and in “shaping legislation and certainly in presenting the drama of COVID and lockdowns to us, and then the vaccine rollout, in such a way as to change human behavior and to change human society,” said Wolf.

Wolf cited the emails between Dr. Anthony Fauci and Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg discussing Facebook’s role in getting the right public health “messages out” during the lockdowns.

People had no choice but to rely on tech platforms while they were locked down, and Big Tech used that to manipulate the public, said Wolf.

“What I do trace in the book is how there was a vast profit that tech companies made by suppressing human assembly, by helping to message that it was unsafe or unlawful to gather in person,” she said. “And when you understand that big tech companies are competing with human beings gathering in human spaces, you understand why there was a vested interest in suppressing human assembly.”

Wolf thinks big tech companies will not stop at just harvesting data on the computer, but that they want to dominate peoples’ bodily autonomy with vaccine passports.

“What these companies want more than anything is to leave the parameters of your computer and to colonize other currently non-colonized spaces, notably the human body,” said Wolf.

This would give these companies and governments the ability to switch off peoples’ access to commerce, travel, and other goods and services if they did not comply with a particular mandate, Wolf added.

Some forms of digital tracking and surveilling are already here in the United States, she said.

“You’re now expected to swipe these QR codes just to see the menu, or just to get in. And the QR code uploads your data to a central database,” she said, adding that she’s seen the software “that maps the relationships of everyone sitting at that table, and then builds databases and networks of relationships.”

Wolf said that on a scale of one to 10 on the Chinese social credit system, the United States is currently at a three.

“There’s a change that’s happened in American cities in the last two years,” she said.

Because most people around the world, particularly in U.S. cities, use digital apps to travel, do banking, and shop, a digital social credit system similar to China’s is imminent, she said.

Our data is being harvested and used by the “global technocratic elite” to control human behavior, said Wolf.

“We’ve assumed that the worst it can be is data are harvested from us with everything that we choose to do using our free will as human beings,” said Wolf.

“But what I’ve seen is that digital technology has its own logic, and it isn’t restricted by what human beings want to do. So once digital platforms and their oligarchical masters can figure out how to change people’s behavior to suit technology, there’s nothing, moral or ethical, that will keep them from changing people’s behavior to suit their technology, and to suit their business plans,” she added.

The pandemic has revealed how this type of digital control is playing out, because humans, before the prevalence of digital technology, did not choose to “socially distance” to fight pandemics, said Wolf.

“The dream of our digital overlords is for technology to tell humans what to do, and that’s exactly where we’re at,” said Wolf.

While some people might label her a conspiracy theorist, her opinions are based on a long career as a journalist, political consultant, and now tech CEO, Wolf said. Furthermore, she has witnessed firsthand the powerful elites making historical decisions under the radar, she said.

Wolf was well acquainted with this group of powerful people until recently when she was ejected from their circles for writing oppositional pieces on lockdowns.

“But it’s really true that the global technocratic elite have more in common with each other than they do with their fellow Germans or Americans or Russians or Chinese, and they now are able to align above the level of nation-states,” she said.

For example, one of the WEF’s goals is to make nation-level decision-making less and less important, and the World Health Organization’s goal is to make public health decisions on a global scale, bypassing countries’ own authorities via the pandemic treaty, said Wolf.

“These technocratic elites really do believe that they can order the world better than you and I and that they have the right to,” she said. “That’s really scary.”

Little by little, humanity’s tolerance for cruelty and authoritarianism has grown.

“The war wasn’t just on us as a political entity, the war was on American culture, and is on American culture,” she said. “And they’ve succeeded largely, unless we wake up, because we were a kind, decent, inclusive culture that respected other people’s boundaries and freedoms. … And now a CCP-style cruelty is something that we tolerate.”

What people believe is largely determined by the news they consume, said Wolf, and many people only watch news outlets that give a skewed picture of pandemic treatments and policies, largely funded by wealthy people like Bill Gates.

“I do trace in ‘The Bodies of Others’ how millions of dollars flowed and are flowing from entities like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to the BBC and the Guardian and NPR and other formerly very credible, objective news outlets.”

Because most people get slanted news coverage, the country is more divided and many people on the left refuse to consider any other narrative or look at primary source documents, because they believe only government sources are giving them “scientific” information, said Wolf.

This skewed messaging has been able to convince people that the mandates and lockdowns are more American and important than liberty or critical thinking.

Wolf said the most brilliant aspect of the pandemic messaging was that it was framed altruistically.

“You know, ‘You’ve got to exclude those people for the good of the community,’ or ‘You’ve got to mask yourself and your child to save your child,’” said Wolf. “This really brilliantly upended American culture because it cast freedom as selfish.”

Now that those in power have effectively conditioned people to be fearful and submissive, they can keep reinstituting emergency powers, she argued.

“That’s what emergency law means,” she said. “They can do whatever they want, basically. It’s a weaponization of boards of health, it’s a weaponization of the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and the [Department of Health and Human Services].”

Wolf said although the situation is dire, people can do something to push back against this tyranny by being informed about what is really going on in the country, assembling in groups, and getting involved politically on the local level.

As it stands now, “I will say that each side is being fed narratives and stereotypes about the other that would persuade each side that the other is absolutely insane and dangerous, dangerously insane,” said Wolf.

“I get that conservatives think, ‘liberals don’t know what a woman is.’ That is not actually literally true, and liberals think ‘conservatives all want to torch our democratic processes, storm the Capitol, and are misogynist, racist thugs who are trigger happy,” said Wolf.

The last two years have conditioned people to fear each other and so the conversations that would have normally occurred when people gathered are not happening and keeping the country divided, said Wolf. She said she will gladly talk to people on the right.

“People I love think I’m doing something wrong in even talking to conservatives and libertarians. That’s very dangerous. The left, especially, has decided that you’re morally complicit if you have a conversation across the aisle,” Wolf said. “That is censorship, that is cancel culture, that’s un-American, that is an importation from Communism.”

She urges people to remember what makes America unique and a beacon to other nations: to remember we are the great experiment where neighbors talked to each other, listened, and didn’t “rat” each other out if they did not agree with each other, Wolf said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/we-dont-have-america-anymore-author-naomi-wolf_4545628.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-21-3&utm_medium=email&est=Ti3V30R3w%2F2JuDx47eYvzpeLpt8HYqj3OhnaBBsqKEGiN5KT8OMKfPTbD%2FFjf51nfw%3D%3D

Fox Business host Larry Kudlow didn’t hold back on a recent segment of his show and told his audience the full extent of the Biden Administration’s failing economic policies.

In part of the segment, Kudlow gives an insight into the latest Fox News poll numbers which show waning confidence in the President’s ability to lead an economic recovery.

He also refuted a common talking point the left often uses about wealthy individuals and major corporations not paying their fair share of taxes.

Notably, Kudlow actually agreed on a few observations recently made by resident Biden about issues plaguing the nation – before highlighting the fact that Biden’s own policies have led to the problems he wants to solve.

Related Posts

• Stock Markets Closed Today In Observance Of Juneteenth.
• Democrats Push Permanent DACA Solution
• Democrats Are Working to Price Americans Out Of Their Second Amendment Rights
• AOC Might Not Back Biden in 2024
• White House Tweets Formula Crisis Update After Press Secretary’s Briefing Gaffe

https://www.americanliberty.news/economics/fox-business-host-exposes-true-impact-of-bidens-economic-policies/alnstaff/2022/06/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ae01&seyid=7381

Tech billionaire Elon Musk revealed that he believes certain unions are primary drivers of the Democratic Party’s and Biden administration’s policies.

“The general public is not aware of the degree to which unions control the Democratic Party. One does not need to speculate on this point,” Musk said in an interview published over the weekend.

Two of Musk’s businesses, Tesla and SpaceX, are not unionized, which Musk says is because of the “negative employment” in Silicon Valley. He says that Tesla workers typically often have numerous job offers.

“Last year, Biden held an EV summit where Tesla was explicitly not allowed to come, but [United Auto Workers] was. So, Tesla has made two-thirds of all the electric vehicles in the United States,” said Musk, who is estimated to be worth more than $250 billion.

United Auto Workers (UAW), with more than 390,000 active members, is one of the largest unions in the United States and has long been a major player in Democratic Party politics since its inception nearly 100 years ago.

“So, deliberately excluding us from an EV summit at the White House—but including UAW—tells you everything you need to know,” Musk said in the interview. “They have so much power over the White House that they can exclude Tesla from an EV summit—insane.”

Musk said that during the recent summit, Biden praised General Motors and its president, Mary Barra, for leading the “EV revolution,” despite GM only delivering 26 electric vehicles in that same quarter. Tesla is by far the largest maker of electric vehicles in the United States.

“That’s some next-level insanity,” he said of the incident.

In early June, Biden also brushed off Musk’s comments on a possible recession and said that other car companies have made recent investments in electric vehicles.

“Well, let me tell you, while Elon Musk is talking about that, Ford is increasing their investment overwhelmingly,” Biden said during an event in response to Musk’s Twitter post about the economy possibly hitting a recession in the coming months.

“I think Ford is increasing investment in building new electric vehicles, 6,000 new employees—union employees, I might add—in the Midwest,” Biden said, noting that “the former Chrysler corporation, Stellantis, they are also making similar investments in electric vehicles.”

Musk has frequently criticized the UAW in recent months, taking a swipe at the union in late March after a former union official pleaded guilty to bilking more than $2 million from the organization.

“UAW slogan – ‘Fighting for the right to embezzle money from auto workers!’” he wrote.

It came days after UAW President Ray Curry said his union hasn’t had any discussions with Tesla or Musk since Musk invited UAW to hold a Tesla union vote.

“That would be a good faith effort if they were interested in having that type of exchange,” Curry said at the time.

The Epoch Times has contacted the UAW for comment.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/elon-musk-reveals-who-he-believes-is-actually-driving-the-democratic-party_4543140.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-19-3&utm_medium=email&est=39ZGsrRDtUuzt9j%2FW%2F%2BEOIK1M3wEHkuoTYkwe617l99RfMcR71%2B%2FazTJhN930toehw%3D%3D

Refineries suggest a different path for Biden administration to boost production

American fossil fuel companies responded on Wednesday to resident Joe Biden’s June 14 letter that accused them of profiteering and driving up gas prices during a “time of war.”

Biden’s letter blamed gas prices, which have skyrocketed from $2.53 per gallon when he took office to $5.00 today, on “Putin’s war of aggression” and greedy corporations, ignoring his own efforts to suppress American fossil fuel production. Since taking power in January 2021, the Biden administration has worked relentlessly across multiple agencies to carry out his campaign pledge in which he stated, “I guarantee you we are going to end fossil fuel.”

Biden’s note to energy executives put the blame for today’s surging gas prices on refineries and the “high profit margins for refining oil into gasoline,” stating that when crude oil was $120 per barrel in March, similar to today’s prices, “the price of gas at the pump was $4.25 per gallon. Today, gas prices are 75 cents higher.” The difference, he claimed, was due to refiners’ profit margins, which have tripled since then. Simultaneously, White House Spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre slammed U.S. oil companies for failing to do their “patriotic duty.”

Responding to Biden’s letter, the American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers stated (pdf) that U.S. refineries are currently operating at 94 percent capacity, among the highest utilization rates in the world, and that prices for oil products are set on world markets based on global supply and demand, not by American companies. According to the Energy Information Administration, refining costs made up 14 percent of the total price of gasoline in 2021. The remainder includes 54 percent for crude oil, 16 percent for distribution, and 16 percent for taxes. Escalating prices have driven up the share of crude oil to 60 percent of the total this month.

Regarding Biden’s complaint that U.S. refineries had pushed gas prices higher by reducing their capacity by 800,000 barrels a day, industry representatives responded that half of the refineries that have shut did so because they are being converted to renewable fuel production. “These investments cannot be easily or quickly undone,” they stated.

The fossil fuel industry, its consumers, and its investors have responded to administration policies designed to reduce production and capacity. This includes federal incentives to replace gasoline-powered cars and trucks with electric vehicles (EVs), cancellation of oil leases in Alaska, canceling new lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, and canceling the $9 billion Keystone Pipeline, for which construction was already underway.

On March 11, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reinstated California’s authority to enforce its own emissions standards for cars and trucks, “which other states can also adopt and enforce,” according to an official statement. “With this authority restored, the EPA will continue partnering with states to advance the next generation of clean vehicle technologies.”

Kathleen Sgama, President of the Western Energy Alliance, stated in a June 16 Fox News interview that “we keep hearing that he’s working like the devil to bring down energy prices and that is anything but the truth.” She noted that there are about 5,900 development leases and 3,000 permits that are currently being held up by environmental litigation.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced the creation of its Office of Environmental Justice, which “will engage all Justice Department bureaus, components and offices in the collective pursuit of environmental justice.” In addition, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a ruling on March 21 that all listed companies must issue audited reports on their greenhouse gas emissions including that of their suppliers.

The SEC action underscored the administration’s alignment with progressive investment managers, pension funds, banks, insurers, and finance ministers who joined together in global clubs like Climate Action 100+, the Global Investors Statement to Governments on Climate Change, the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, and the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero. Members of these clubs have signed joint pledges to reduce or eliminate financing for the fossil fuel industry.

The sum effect of these policies has been a chilling effect on fossil fuel investment. The last major refinery built in America was in 1977, long before the current administration, but Chevron CEO Mike Wirth stated that he does not expect any new refineries will be built in the United States for economic and political reasons.

“We’ve seen refineries closed,” Wirth stated. “We’ve seen refineries being repurposed to become bio refineries. And we live in a world where the policy, the stated policy of the U.S. government is to reduce demand for the products that refiners produce.” Currently, the United States has 129 operable refineries.

Many in the fossil fuel industry see current gas prices as the result of a deliberate and continuing effort by the Biden administration to force Americans to switch from oil and gas to renewable energy.

Biden recently praised oil price hikes as “an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels.” And Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm stated that rising oil prices were “an exclamation point” demonstrating the need to switch from oil to wind and solar, previously advising Americans that “if you drive an electric car, this would not be affecting you.”

“They want this current situation,” Daniel Turner, Executive Director of Power the Future, an energy advocacy group, told The Epoch Times. “They want the status quo, they just don’t want the political fallout from it. The Biden administration needs to understand that if they’re going to pursue this agenda, then there are going to be consequences. It’s almost childlike naivete to think that you can have such a radical agenda and not have any consequences. It just shows how unserious and in-over-their-heads this administration is.”

But the progressive push to curtail fossil fuels is taking effect before renewables such as wind and solar are capable of filling the gap. Price hikes and shortages of gasoline, diesel, and fertilizer—an oil derivative—have had a ripple effect throughout the economy, hitting not only prices at the pump but also food prices, shipping and delivery expenses, and the cost of products that use plastic or other oil-based components.

To the many things that Democrats have blamed on Russia, including buying Facebook ads to support President Trump’s campaign and spreading misinformation, Biden has now added America’s inflationary crisis. “There is no question that Vladimir Putin is principally responsible for the intense financial pain the American people and their families are bearing,” he wrote.

He encouraged refineries to stand up to Putin and “take immediate actions to increase the supply of gasoline, oil, and diesel.” Biden said he has done his part by releasing supplies from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, allowing greater use of ethanol in gasoline, and using the Defense Production Act to provide inputs for energy production.

The fossil fuel industry responded to Biden that better solutions would include “promoting infrastructure development, addressing escalating regulatory compliance costs, allowing all technologies to compete to reduce emissions, modernizing fuels policies, and ensuring capital markets are functioning for all participants.”

Meanwhile, Biden has planned a trip to Saudi Arabia in July to implore oil producers there to boost their output. And the Biden administration has been working on a deal with Iran to end sanctions, allowing them to sell more oil as well.

“I wish the Biden administration made the same overtures and had the same spirit of collaboration with [American oil companies] that they have with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Maduro government in Venezuela, and the Ayatollah in Iran,” Turner said. “The American oil and gas industry just gets threats and questioning of our patriotism.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-bashes-oil-companies-for-going-along-with-his-plan-to-end-fossil-fuel_4540127.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-19-2&utm_medium=email&est=EKw%2BsYZXaF8lsAYqgTBMk5ToBF9w9v7CM6Hz586DgmD8CZmkQAF%2Br0TwGOwS61E1QQ%3D%3D

Chevron this week released a statement addressing resident Joe Biden’s letter to oil companies that suggested he may take executive action amid record-high gas prices.

“We understand the significant concerns around higher fuel prices currently faced by consumers around the country, and the world. We share these concerns, and expect the Administration’s approach to energy policy will start to better reflect the importance of addressing them,” Chevron said in a statement to Biden.

The president sent letters Wednesday to Marathon Petroleum Corp., Valero Energy Corp., ExxonMobil, Phillips 66, Chevron, BP, and Shell to demand action on lowering gas prices. He asked why oil companies are not refining more and claimed they are reaping windfall profits.

“At a time of war, refinery profit margins well above normal being passed directly onto American families are not acceptable,” Biden wrote, according to the letter. This weak, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated that oil producers have a “patriotic duty” to increase refining capacity, although she told a reporter Thursday that the United States doesn’t need to be drilling more to deal with the record prices at the pump.

Chevron further said that since Biden took office in January 2021, his administration has signaled that it will “impose obstacles to our industry delivering energy resources the world needs.”

While the firm did not elaborate, it may have been referring to a flurry of executive orders targeting the oil industry such as killing the Keystone XL pipeline, suspending new oil drilling leases on federal lands, and ending fossil fuel subsidies used by certain agencies, among other measures.

Chevron also stated it will increase its Permian Basin production by 15 percent in 2022, while other oil firms have said they’ve already increased capacity in light of the gas prices.

“Our refineries are running full out,” Bruce Niemeyer, corporate vice president of strategy and sustainability at Chevron, told the Reuters news agency on Tuesday. Meanwhile, Shell told the news outlet that it is “producing at capacity” and looking at options to increase oil production.

ExxonMobil also issued a response to Biden’s letter and provided what it described as short-term and long-term solutions.

“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” the energy company said in a news release Wednesday.

In the longer term, the federal government “can promote investment through clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development, such as regular and predictable lease sales, as well as streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines,” according to ExxonMobil.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/chevron-more-oil-companies-push-back-on-bidens-warning-letter_4540244.html?utm_source=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-06-17&utm_medium=email&est=6hnZSQ4qwlozqKOyAYnuxaDLlzFm2yTOX9DAsM8KeZ16iZBMRyYzR1VB1MOM5Df0hw%3D%3D

The United States has increased heavy crude imports amid Western sanctions on Russia and resident Joe Biden’s letter calling on U.S. energy producers to make more gasoline and diesel.

Customs data shows that U.S. refiners last month imported the highest number of crude barrels in nearly two years, with refiners importing 33.5 million barrels of heavy crude in May.

According to the data, 56 vessels discharged nearly 1.1 million barrels per day (bpd) of Mexico’s Maya, Ecuador’s Napo and Oriente, and Iraq’s Basra heavy, among other grades.

Heavy crudes cost less than lighter shale oils that are produced in the United States and typically produce more diesel and less gasoline.

U.S. inventories of diesel were down to 104 million barrels in May, with further declines expected. Meanwhile, margins continue to rise, further lining refiners’ pockets.

While higher heavy-crude imports are common in summer-driving months, the latest boost to imports comes after the Biden administration called on refiners to bring “near-term solutions” to address rising gas prices and inflation levels at a 40-year-high.

“Your companies and others have an opportunity to take immediate actions to increase the supply of gasoline, diesel, and other refined product you are producing,” Biden wrote in the letter to oil refiners.

“My administration is prepared to use all reasonable and appropriate Federal Government tools and emergency authorities to increase refinery capacity and output in the near term, and to ensure that every region of this country is appropriately supplied.”

Biden’s letter comes as gas prices have soared across the country, currently standing at a national average of  $5 per gallon, according to AAA.

The president has attributed the higher prices to the Russia–Ukraine war and increased demand after the COVID-19 pandemic.

In response to Biden’s letter to Marathon Petroleum Corp., Valero Energy Corp., Phillips 66, Chevron, BP, Shell, and ExxonMobil, the latter released a statement stating that the administration’s policies were partly to blame for the current economic climate.

“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” ExxonMobil said Wednesday.

The oil giant states that it has also “been investing more than any other company to develop U.S. oil and gas supplies” including more than $50 billion over the past five years, which it says has boosted U.S. production of oil during this period by nearly 50 percent.

“Longer term, [the] government can promote investment through clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development, such as regular and predictable lease sales, as well as streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines,” it added.

Imports of Mexico’s heavy crudes, mainly Maya and Altamira, reached around 507,000 barrels per day last month, the highest in 11 months, while fuel oil imports from Mexico were near a record at 156,000 bpd.

U.S. refiners also imported a record volume of Basra Heavy crude from Iraq, nearly 129,000 bpd, in May while imports of Ecuadorian Oriente and Napo crudes reached around 112,000 bpd, the highest in 12 months.

Among the heaviest crude buyers were Valero Energy Corp’s Benicia and PBF Energy’s Martinez refinery, both of which are located in California, and Chevron’s refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

“We have healthy demand, low products inventories, and strained refining capacity,” said Refinitiv senior energy analyst Corey Stewart. “Refiners are looking to bring feedstocks into the U.S. to most economically meet what products the markets demand,” he added.

Reuters contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-refiners-boost-heavy-crude-imports-as-biden-threatens-executive-action_4539888.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-17-1&utm_medium=email&est=cRsQaFZVGonJ3PUgTUNXAaUZE3BX2gcVzSMN8B9cQY6PQNown8DYwv2mHSyeCcONJw%3D%3D

The Exxon Mobil Corportation fired back at resident Joe Biden’s letter calling on U.S. energy producers to bring “near-term solutions” to address rising gas prices and decades-high inflation.

“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” the oil giant said in a news release Wednesday.

And in the longer term, the federal government “can promote investment through clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development, such as regular and predictable lease sales, as well as streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines,” according to ExxonMobil.

Notably, Biden signed an executive order in early 2021 that suspended construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought oil from Alberta, Canada, to the interior United States. The move was criticized by oil industry officials, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Republicans.

In recent days, the president has increasingly blamed oil companies for allegedly gouging consumers as gas prices remain elevated at $5 per gallon. Gas prices nationwide are averaging roughly $5 a gallon, an economic burden for many Americans and a political threat for Biden’s fellow Democrats going into the midterm elections.

“The crunch that families are facing deserves immediate action,” Biden wrote in a letter this week to seven oil refiners, including Exxon. “Your companies need to work with my Administration to bring forward concrete, near-term solutions that address the crisis.”

In the letter, Biden suggested that he might use emergency powers, adding that his “administration is prepared to use all reasonable and appropriate Federal Government tools and emergency authorities to increase refinery capacity and output in the near term, and to ensure that every region of this country is appropriately supplied.”

But the American Petroleum Institute, which represents the industry, said in a statement that capacity has been diminished as the Biden administration has sought to move away from fossil fuels as part of its climate agenda. Meanwhile, several prominent White House officials continue to tout electric vehicles as a means to escape the current high gas prices despite the average cost of a new EV being about $56,000.

“While we appreciate the opportunity to open increased dialogue with the White House, the administration’s misguided policy agenda shifting away from domestic oil and natural gas has compounded inflationary pressures and added headwinds to companies’ daily efforts to meet growing energy needs while reducing emissions,” American Petroleum Institute CEO Mike Sommers said in a statement.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/exxon-mobil-fires-back-at-biden-after-letter-warning-use-of-emergency-powers_4537760.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-16-3&utm_medium=email&est=ky1D1DxepuLBJXT2XmTv1ZgpNbq3DrWqY7N%2BVj6bL4RGxuhIkI%2FDKCJV3%2FsdZ9%2BkjA%3D%3D

Amid continually increasing gas prices, White House officials have continually recommended that Americans feeling pain at the pump should switch to electric vehicles.

During a live streaming event this week, the Biden administration’s energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm, said a way to deal with $5 per gallon gas is to purchase an electric vehicle

“If you filled up your EV [electric vehicle] and you filled up your gas tank with gasoline, you would save $60 per fill-up by going electric rather than using gasoline, but it’s a very compelling case. But again, we want to bring down the price at the point of purchase,” she said in a clip circulated by Republicans on social media on June 14.

Her comments received significant criticism from Republican lawmakers and conservatives on social media, who accused Granholm, a former Michigan governor, of being out of touch. Last year, Granholm sold millions of dollars in stock options from Proterra—a company that manufactures electric buses.

“If you drive an electric car, this would not be affecting you,” she said in May 2021 in reference to the elevated gas prices.

And several weeks ago, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg touted electric vehicles to a House panel amid increasing gas prices and Republican concerns that motorists in rural areas won’t benefit from more federal spending on electric vehicles.

“It is actually rural drivers who would benefit the most,” Buttigieg said in May. “The more they drive, typically, the more of their income is going to gas, so the more money they are going to save if they can afford an electric vehicle, which allows them to fill up on electrons.”

Last year, Buttigieg drew criticism for telling families who are struggling with high gas prices to buy an electric vehicle, because if they do, they’ll “never have to worry about gas prices again.”

According to Kelly Blue Book’s late 2021 figures, the average price of a new electric vehicle hovered at roughly $56,000. In contrast, the average price of a new compact was about $25,000 at about the same time. The average price of a new, non-electric SUV was $34,000, while the electric version was nearly $45,000.

The 2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV starts at about $31,500, according to the website.

As of June 16, data from auto club AAA show that the average price for a gallon of regular gas fell by about 1 cent to $5.009 across the United States. California, as usual, led the way with prices hitting $6.428, the figures show, and no other state had a gas price of $6 per gallon.

Biden himself said in late May that the record gas prices will spur Americans to purchase electric vehicles. Earlier this year, Biden announced the release of 180 million barrels of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which the White House said would cause gas prices to “come down fairly significantly.”

“[When] it comes to the gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels when this is over,” Biden said during a trip to Japan.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/white-house-keeps-suggesting-electric-vehicles-as-fix-for-record-gas-prices_4537592.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-16-2&utm_medium=email&est=NIUx48vHQY1LykdcsjvQtNQ76IYXB35E8bGIm%2BuFSQZ106fSc1BKEKDGbKkOGH0qjg%3D%3D

The only thing that could curb the current record-high gasoline prices would be a major drop in demand, i.e. a recession, according to several experts. Theoretically, a major shift in U.S. foreign and energy policy could make a difference too, but nobody seems to realistically expect that to happen.

Gas prices have particularly pained Americans, climbing in recent months to more than $5 a gallon. Some experts even consider it the driver of price inflation, which hit a four-decade high of 8.6 percent in May. The price hike has been caused by several factors piling up, including currency inflation, anti-carbon policy moves, misjudging the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

“We’ve made a lot of policy errors in this country and overseas to put us in this situation and it’s not going to be easily fixed,” commented Phil Flynn, senior analyst with The Price Futures Group.

“If we start to reverse some of those policies, the market can start pricing in a better future.”

The American Petroleum Institute, an industry group, on June 14 released a list of 10 steps the U.S. government should take to boost domestic oil production, which still lags behind pre-pandemic levels and barely budged for half a year now. Top of the list is restarting drilling leases on federal land and speeding up project approvals.

But since the Biden administration has centered its agenda around “decarbonizing” the economy, chances of any pro-oil policy moves are expected to be nil.

Tight Supply

The administration has been begging foreign producers, from Saudi Arabia to Venezuela, to pump out more, but with little success.

“People are estimating that global spare production capacity can be as low as 2 million barrels a day,” Flynn said, noting that “we’ve already stretched the system to the limit.”

Refineries have emerged as another bottleneck with no apparent fix in sight. Refining capacity in the United States and Europe has been declining for years under the mantra of moving away from fossil fuels. Meanwhile, as the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020 and governments locked down large swaths of the economy and population, oil prices collapsed and the industry was stuck with massive excess capacity. The prospects at the time were deary. Not only was there no end of the pandemic in sight, but financial elites openly discussed using the crisis as an opportunity to move away from oil. Especially in the financial sector, the “environment, social, governance” (ESG) initiatives went into overdrive, promising to starve the oil industry of capital. Investment prospects in the industry took a severe hit.

“We had people predicting that oil demand would never get to pre-pandemic levels,” Flynn told The Epoch Times.

As it turned out, the pandemic didn’t cripple the economy quite as severely as expected. Many U.S. states quickly started lifting the lockdowns and by the end of the year just about returned to normal. The vaccine was delivered before the end of the year, allowing reopening even in most areas that were previously reluctant to do so. Demand quickly bounced back and so did the oil market.

U.S. oil product demand reached roughly the pre-pandemic level in June last year, even as domestic oil production still lagged about 2 million barrels per day (bpd) behind the pre-pandemic maximum of over 13 million bpd.

With the inauguration of President Joe Biden came a new era of “whole of government” anti-fossil fuel policy. The administration stopped leasing federal land for drilling and nixed the Keystone XL pipeline, further squashing long-term industry prospects.

To attract investors, oil companies adopted a strategy of “efficiency”—cut costs, cut development, and instead send their profits to stockholders. The strategy has somewhat worked, but only at the expense of future production and processing capacity.

The Biden administration has recently blamed refineries and oil companies for profiting from the high oil prices, which have been hovering around $120 a barrel for the past few days—more than double from a year ago.

But some experts have argued that it’s been the excessive government spending and the subsequent money printing by the Federal Reserve that has allowed the oil industry to raise prices so much without, so far, significantly affecting demand.

“The government never makes any mistakes. Have you ever noticed that,” Flynn quipped.

Excise tax on oil recently floated by the administration would be “disastrous for the economy,” he said.

“If you kill the refining margins, you’re going to kill the incentive to work and you’re going to have less supply,” he explained.

Ukraine Invasion

The Russian invasion of Ukraine earlier this year was timed to take advantage of the tight oil supply, according to Art Berman, geologist and energy expert.

“Putin knew what he was doing,” he told Wealthion’s Adam Taggart in a recent interview, noting the Russian President has a Ph.D. in energy economics.

Oil prices rallied on concerns that Western sanctions on Russia will prevent it from selling its oil.

Such expectations haven’t materialized. European countries still buy the majority of Russian oil and China and India continue to buy too, albeit at a discount.

E.U. leaders have been promising to ban oil imports from Russia, but Berman doesn’t believe that’s realistic.

“They’re absolutely incapable of doing that,” he said.

The U.S. and the E.U. could also put pressure on India to stop buying.

“But they haven’t done that yet because they know, at the end of the day, if they do that, oil prices will go to $300,” Flynn said.

Russia is the world’s second-largest oil producer and it appears there’s just not enough spare capacity available to exclude it completely.

There are already examples of clever schemes to dodge the sanctions. Russia-made diesel is mixed with diesel of other origins, resulting in a product that can be shipped to Europe without restrictions, Berman said.

Price Drop

Berman predicted oil prices will come down significantly, but only through “demand destruction.” He argued that, historically, inflation and high gas prices in particular have caused consumers to cut back. He expects that U.S. gas and diesel consumption could drop about 10 percent in the next 12–18 months. That could lead to an oil glut and price collapse, but it could very well also mean a recession.

From an investment perspective, Lance Roberts, chief investment strategist at RIA Advisors, warned that oil rallies tend to unwind just as suddenly as they build up.

“Oil prices are all driven by commodity traders. So oil prices are somewhat supply-demand driven, but a lot of it is these non-commercial speculators in the options markets that are driving oil prices through options contracts. Right now, everybody is ramping up their oil contracts,” he said during a recent Wealthion interview.

“Well at some point, somebody says, ‘I’m out.’ … He’s like the popular guy that brings all the people to a party. Whoever that guy is, when he says, ‘I’m out,’ the rest of the herd follows him.”

Flynn doesn’t see that happening—at least not in the short term.

“Technically, most people think we’re in a recession right now, but assuming that we are, it might be a mild recession,” he said.

He expects “real demand destruction” would only come if oil climbs even further, perhaps to $150 a barrel.

Both Flynn and Berman agreed that in the longer term, oil prices will remain high.

“We can see a big correction of $30 … I think it will recover … I think it would only be a pause in the bull market,” Flynn said.

The Fed’s flurry of interest rate hikes may be the wild card that could pull the rug from under the economy more broadly.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/major-recession-only-realistic-way-for-gasoline-price-to-drop-experts_4535959.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-16-1&utm_medium=email&est=ZYjHEB7ybGnPP%2Fgdk8YHmlQVlmLptWjj1iyKzXylQ64OSzwG8E48jarEMQRDSMkD0Q%3D%3D

The Biden administration’s climate czar, John Kerry, proclaimed that despite record-high gas prices, the United States doesn’t need to drill for more oil or natural gas.

Speaking during a forum, Kerry said that Republicans and some analysts have suggested that “we need more drilling” and “we need to go back to coal.” He then argued: “No, we don’t. We absolutely don’t.”

The former secretary of state also suggested that he will push back on alleged false narratives that the United States needs to drill more and use more traditional energy sources. Kerry delivered his remarks at the University of Southern California’s Center for Public Diplomacy on June 10.

“We have to prevent a false narrative from entering into this,” he said.

Kerry’s comments come as data from auto club AAA shows that the average price for a gallon of gasoline remained steady at $5.01 nationwide. California is still leading the way with an average price of $6.43 per gallon. No other state has reached $6 gas so far.

Because of the elevated prices, Republicans and oil industry executives have suggested that the Biden administration’s policies are at least partially to blame. President Joe Biden issued a series of executive orders last year, including suspending the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, suspending new drilling on federal land, and ending federal subsidies for fossil fuels, among other orders.

Democrats and Biden, meanwhile, have said the high gas prices are caused by the war in Ukraine, often blaming the spike on Russian President Vladimir Putin. However, gas prices and year-over-year inflation had been rising long before the invasion in February.

Some analysts, including GasBuddy, have said that a surge in the demand for oil and other petroleum products as countries emerge from COVID-19 lockdowns is also contributing to the high prices. A report in June of last year found that U.S. refining capability shrunk about 4.5 percent in 2020 as COVID-19 caused oil and gas facilities to shut down.

Although Kerry said the United States and other Western countries shouldn’t opt for more coal-based energy, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been heavily promoting relying more on coal-fired plants in recent months. CCP officials in April said China, which has a significant amount of coal reserves, plans on boosting coal production by 300 million tons in 2022, according to reports. That’s equal to 7 percent of last year’s output of 4.1 billion tons, or a 5.7 percent increase over 2020’s figures, according to The Associated Press.

And late last month, India’s government said that it would reopen old coal mines to increase output by 100 million tons as cities have suffered frequent rolling blackouts amid a heat wave. In a memo released on May 7, the Indian environmental ministry gave coal mines permission to boost production by as much as 50 percent without permits.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/john-kerry-we-absolutely-dont-need-to-drill-for-oil-as-gas-prices-soar_4535220.html?utm_source=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-06-15&utm_medium=email&est=t2kmr%2BCN4FU1WTZweFQ067FnnYcw6Tk5fBZiiZbaZpdt9YSH7PkDRC6i0fQi6HjVLg%3D%3D

God…please bring back our true president, and evict the current resident. [US Patriot]

The White House and its allies are circulating a misleading talking point that the Biden administration is overseeing the most oil production in U.S. history.

Both White House chief of staff Ron Klain and resident Joe Biden have used the talking point as a response to Republican criticism that Democrats are discouraging domestic energy production through regulation and not issuing new drilling permits. Earlier this month, Klain shared a chart on Twitter showing oil production under Biden—at an annual average of 11.18 million barrels a day—was higher than any of his five predecessors. In March, Biden said the United States was “approaching record levels of oil and natural gas production.”

The claim from Democrats that domestic production is higher now than during the Trump administration is based on a comparison of four-year averages that includes the tremendous drop in economic activity at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Domestic oil production under Biden has yet to come close to the pre-pandemic levels reached under the prior administration, a more detailed Free Beacon analysis found.

The Free Beacon analysis of domestic crude oil production data shows that prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States produced just under 13 million barrels of oil per day at the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020. For comparison, that figure is more than 20 percent higher than the amount of oil the United States produced per day in September 2021. Energy industry expert James Wilson, who runs an oil and gas economics consulting firm, says the White House is abusing statistics to fit a narrative.

“You can claim anything with statistics,” Wilson told the Washington Free Beacon. “When COVID hit, the price of oil dropped and then production dropped. Surprise, surprise.”

The White House’s insistence on repeating the oil production claim bolsters the impression increasingly held by the public and some Democrats that the Biden administration is out of ideas to tackle rising prices. Even as the cost of gas skyrockets, the White House is sharing a months-old graph from liberal blogger Matthew Yglesias, a symptom of an office “defined by insularity,” as Politico has described it.

Lots of assertions on this website about why gasoline production is not keeping up with demand, but here’s a fact about US oil output: pic.twitter.com/VP0Rf95eP8

— Ronald Klain (@WHCOS) June 12, 2022

Domestic oil production trends prior to the pandemic show how misleading these sorts of claims are. For example, the United States produced an average of a million barrels more per day between the start of 2019 to April 2020 than the 11.185 million barrels a day averaged under Biden.

Biden told a group of labor union leaders on Tuesday that “I’m doing everything in my power to blunt Putin’s gas price hike” and blamed rising prices on “nothing else but that.” Despite that claim, federal data show that average daily domestic oil production in March, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, was lower than in November of last year.

Unlike during Trump’s final year in office, consumer demand for energy is elevated today. Total U.S. petroleum consumption is estimated to rise 730,000 barrels per day this year over last, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Some industry analysts point to macroeconomic trends out of the Biden administration’s control, such as oil companies’ reluctance to invest in new drilling sites because of shareholder pressure, as reasons for lower domestic production. That explanation, Wilson says, does not tell the full story.

“Another thing that’s inhibiting these guys from drilling is uncertainty about what this administration was and is going to do,” Wilson said, referring to new and potential future regulations against the oil and gas industry. “The bottom line is that when Trump was president, these companies started producing and oil was cheaper.”

Earlier this month gas prices hit an average of $5 a gallon nationwide. Industry analysts expect that price to only increase throughout the summer when more Americans travel for vacation.

The rising price of gas and household goods is the driving force behind Biden’s plummeting approval rating. A majority of voters say the economy is their top concern in multiple surveys, and a RealClearPolitics aggregate of recent polls shows Americans’ approval of Biden’s job performance is lower than at any time since he entered office.

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/is-america-really-producing-more-oil-under-biden-than-trump-no-obviously-not/

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) is facing backlash this week after she bragged to a Senate panel that gasoline prices don’t affect her because she drives an electric vehicle.

“I just have to say, on the issue of gas prices, after waiting for a long time to have enough chips in this country to get my electric vehicle, I drove it from Michigan to [Washington, D.C.] this last weekend and went by every single gas station and it didn’t matter how high it was,” Stabenow said at a Senate Finance Committee hearing on June 7.

As of June 8, the national average price of regular gasoline inched closer to $5 per gallon and now stands at $4.95, according to data from AAA. In Michigan, gasoline averages $5.21 per gallon, which is about 51 cents higher than the previous week and more than $2 higher than a year ago.

Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), in response, said that the average cost for a new electric vehicle is $60,000. The Kelley Blue Book puts the new electric vehicle price at about $56,000 on average.

“Democrats don’t understand the problems of everyday Americans,” Kelly said on Twitter in response to the video. Conservative commentators also accused Stabenow of being out of touch with working-class people on social media.

Stabenow drives a Chevrolet Bolt EUV, which has a starting price of about $28,000 for its 2023 model, Michigan news website MLive reported.

The Democratic senator will “never apologize” for driving the electric vehicle, which is manufactured in Michigan, a spokesperson for Stabenow told that website. Conservatives should apologize to auto workers “for disrespecting the products they work hard to make,” the spokesperson, Robyn Bryan, added in a statement.

“Instead of helping the oil companies line their pockets with Michigan drivers’ hard-earned money, these critics should join the senator’s fight to end price gouging at the pump,” Bryan said.

In recent months, the senator has often promoted electric vehicle usage and led congressional efforts to offer consumer tax credits for electric vehicles.

“I’m looking forward to the opportunity for us to move to vehicles that aren’t going to be dependent on the whims of the oil companies and the international markets,” Stabenow said on June 7.

A recent report in May suggested that the cost of electric vehicle batteries may increase as much as 15 percent amid supply chain disruptions. China is the world’s largest battery manufacturer in the world, and reports have shown that more than half of the world’s lithium, cobalt, and graphite processing and refining capacity is located in the Communist Party-controlled country.

Several White House officials have similarly drawn criticism for promoting electric vehicles amid record-high gas prices. In March, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg urged Americans to transition to such vehicles alongside Vice President Kamala Harris in a news conference.

Stabenow’s office didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/michigan-senator-criticized-for-touting-electric-car-dismissing-surging-gas-prices_4521007.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-08-4&utm_medium=email&est=89ucpItqyd1KrBYFaHcJ515yY8cyl0KjMpypl%2BNjWg2mmpyidij0qY9OjjlGdQeGXA%3D%3D

New York billionaire and refiner John Catsimatidis warned that rising interest rates could produce ill effects on the U.S. economy.

The White House’s “obsession” against “turning on North American oil spigots” has triggered a significant hike in energy costs and inflation, Catsimatidis told Fox Business on Tuesday. He noted that the Biden administration asked Saudi Arabia and other nations for more crude oil production rather than boosting domestic output.

“We have 100 years’ worth of oil [in the U.S.]. Let [the government] open up the spigots and the price of crude oil will come back down to $55, $60, maybe $65—half,’” said Catsimatidis, the head of the United Refining Company and also the Gristedes Supermarkets retailer.

He added that the Federal Reserve’s choice to hike interest rates amid high inflation and soaring energy costs could trigger a recession. Other high-profile business leaders have issued similar warnings in recent weeks. Federal data for April indicated the inflation rate has risen 8.3 percent, while AAA data suggests the average price for a gallon of regular gas is nearing $5.

“Somebody’s on the path to destruct America, and somebody’s got to say ‘guys, enough is enough,’” he told Fox. “You know what the cost has been to the American people because of the rising gas prices—the cost of the rising food prices—it’s going to go even higher with $120 oil,” Catsimatidis said.

White House officials this week suggested that there is little the administration can do to alleviate high costs at the pump. They’ve primarily cast the blame on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, along with oil companies.

“You know, this is, in large part, caused by [Russian aggression],” Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo alleged in a recent interview with CNN. “Gas prices have gone up over $1.40 a gallon” since Russian troops moved closer to Ukraine’s border earlier this year, “and the president is asking for Congress and others for potential ideas,” she said.

Republicans have said Biden’s executive orders—including a flurry of rules that were authorized after President Biden took office in January 2021—have driven up the public and private costs of oil drilling in the United States by halting drilling on public lands and canceling the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have brought crude oil from Alberta, Canada, to the interior U.S.

But Raimondo told CNN that the prices will not go down until the conflict ends, again pinning the blame on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“But again, especially what we need to do is get [Moscow] to end this war. And that is also something that we are working as hard as we can to do. … The President is thinking about this every day and pushing his team and Congress to come up with any idea possible because we’re deeply aware of how this is hurting American families,” Raimondo said.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/oil-billionaire-warns-somebodys-on-path-to-destruct-america_4520514.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-08-3&utm_medium=email&est=faE8f%2F6UWVY%2F589MESms5PpBx7xDaxpVfVfVqu2dMoLVqDyaRLo3ycb%2FwnjhcDstMQ%3D%3D

Over the last month, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil prices have surged nearly 20 percent to around $120 per barrel. Despite soaring energy prices, U.S. output is still below pre-pandemic levels, with analysts pointing to Washington and cash discipline as the causes.

WTI and Brent, the international benchmark for oil prices, have rallied in recent sessions on China’s economic reopening and Saudi state-owned oil producer Saudi Aramco having raised the price of Arabia light crude for Asian customers by $2.10 per barrel. The European Union’s plan to reduce its imports of Russian energy by 90 percent at the end of 2022 has also contributed to the latest gains.

But the U.S. oil and gas industry’s lack of significant activity continues to play a major role in the commodity’s gains.

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), domestic production totaled 11.9 million barrels per day (bpd) in the week ending May 27. This is unchanged from the same time in the previous month, and it remains under the peak of 13.1 million bpd in February 2020.

Industry activity has quieted down in recent weeks. The Baker Hughes oil rig count stood at 574 for the second consecutive week.

This could exacerbate the sector’s fragile situation, particularly after the United States has seen three straight weeks of notable supply drawdowns, totaling nearly 10 million barrels. Moreover, inventories at the Cushing, Oklahoma storage facility recently recorded a small build of 256,000 barrels following three consecutive weeks of withdrawals totaling close to 4 million barrels.

A first-quarter Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas Quarterly Energy Survey revealed that public firms have been “practicing capital discipline in 2021” to satisfy investors’ requirements. Globally, collective exploration and development (E&D) expenditures rose by a tepid 1 percent last year, the EIA noted in a recent report.

This cash discipline has been the new normal for domestic onshore shale firms, says Campbell Faulkner, the senior vice president and chief data analyst at OTC Global Holdings, the world’s largest independent institutional broker of commodities.

“Additionally, there has not been a flood of cash via private equity into new entities to begin drilling across the U.S.,” Faulkner told The Epoch Times. “Inflation and labor shortages have also greatly crimped the ability for shale firms to even modestly expand their capital expenditures (CapEx) while experiencing robust cash flows.”

Moreover, with the financial sector focusing on ESG, it has become challenging for the fossil fuel industry to attract new investment. Some of the world’s largest banks have been divesting from or applying restrictions on the fossil fuel industry and certain projects, according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA). The report noted that banks like Citigroup would not invest in Arctic drilling, while MetLife is restricting investment in the oil sands.

But U.S. production could enjoy revived growth over the next couple of years, says Rystad Energy.

Permian crude production growth is forecast to outpace Iraq this year. The Permian Basin, which is a vast shale basin situated in west Texas, is projected to expand by approximately 1 million bpd to 5.6 million bpd this year and then climb to as much as 6.5 million bpd in 2023.

The Middle Eastern nation produces roughly 4.4 million bpd.

“The Permian has become the hot spot for U.S. oil production thanks to significant resources, low breakeven costs, and high oil content. This trend is only likely to continue as global oil markets struggle with supply constraints and the demand for oil shows little sign of easing,” wrote Espen Erlingsen, head of upstream research at Rystad Energy, in a research note.

Quinn Kiley, Managing Director and Energy Portfolio Manager at Tortoise, also reported in a recent QuickTake Podcast that Kinder Morgan increased its 2022 capital budget guidance by $300 million.

“The market had been punishing companies for increased spending, but Kinder traded well last week,” Kiley said. “The shift may be an acknowledgment by the market that new infrastructure is needed to reduce long-term inflation due to higher commodity prices. Or it may be a signal that spending on natural gas infrastructure and CO2 sequestration is what the market wants as it looks to a realistic energy transition strategy.”

Still, Faulkner contends that greater activity can only become ubiquitous throughout the industry if the “Biden administration ceases its predatory stance against domestic oil and gas production.”

Bob Bilbruck, the CEO at Captjur, a technology and strategic services firm, echoed this sentiment, telling The Epoch Times that the White House has made “it very hard to drill for oil.”

“It’s a cute little political game they are playing with the oil industry to make it appear that they are pro-drilling but when the rubber hits the road they are making it very hard on these companies to get new drilling leases and operations under way,” Bilbruck stated.

Last month, the Biden administration pulled three offshore oil lease sales in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. Critics warn that replacements for these leases will not happen overnight since it is a rigorous regulatory process that consists of environmental analysis, public consultation, and government reviews.

President Joe Biden suspended new oil and gas leasing on federal land and waters last year, but the directive was halted by a Louisiana judge, forcing the administration to continue leasing.

Despite the rhetoric emanating from Washington, ESG and climate-related risks will start taking a backseat in the short-term due to the plethora of challenges the global economy is facing, according to Jarand Rystad, the CEO of Rystad Energy.

“As companies continue to consider how they can ease the supply crisis in the face of the new geopolitical situation, while investors review their portfolios in a new light as supply chain issues persist, we are likely to see new commercial models emerge as energy security, inflation, and interest risk in the short-term trump ESG and climate related risks,” he stated in a note. “In the longer term, however, the Russian invasion has triggered an acceleration of renewable energy initiatives, especially in Europe.”

Will Prices Come Down Soon?

For the global energy market to rebalance, crude prices need to average $135 a barrel in the 12 months beginning in July, Goldman Sachs analysts predicted in a new note. Prices are expected to surge to $140 this summer amid a drop in Russian output, recovering Chinese demand, and the busy U.S. driving season.

“The negative global growth impulse remains insufficient to rebalance inventories at current prices,” analysts Damien Courvalin and Jeffrey Currie wrote. “Oil prices need to rally further to normalize the unsustainably low levels of global oil inventories, as well as OPEC and refining spare capacities.

Motorists will feel like crude oil is closer to $160 a barrel because of the refining shortage, the investment bank warned. Over the last year, there have been intense bottlenecks at refineries, resulting in soaring gasoline prices. Gasoline stocks have also fallen 11 of the last 12 weeks.

According to the American Automobile Association (AAA), the national average price for a gallon of gasoline is $4.92, up more than 61 percent year-over-year.

The price hikes will not end anytime soon, writes Phil Flynn, a market analyst and author of The Energy Report, citing the futures market. This, he says, will harm economic growth, consumers, and businesses.

July RBOB gasoline futures have risen more than 17 percent over the last month on the New York Mercantile Exchange, adding to their year-to-date gain of 86 percent.

But should inflation continue to be stubbornly high and the economy slips into a recession, oil prices could fall back to around $100, purports Faulkner.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-crude-output-still-below-pre-crisis-levels-slowing-production-could-weigh-on-growth_4517660.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-06-08-1&utm_medium=email&est=X2t82JxhBvQBkTv6SJS7sjMjDDDsxyWGgvLlU4yiNu15%2B%2F5yfX9U6tS6FyA%2FGWVO1A%3D%3D

We all know the gas crisis was caused by the Biden administration. He might be blaming Putin, but we know the truth.

His administration reversed Trump’s pro-energy agenda. And the severe limits Biden set on oil companies triggered this runaway crisis.

Months ago, Biden depleted our strategic oil reserve to “fix” the problem. Then he bragged that gas dropped two cents.

INSERT TWEET

Pathetic. But even that flex was pointless. Because now, as we enter summer, the national average is higher than ever.

From Townhall:

Yet again on Thursday, the national average price for a gallon of unleaded gas set a new all-time high at $4.715…

Now, six months after Democrats were thanking Joe Biden for a two-cent savings at the pump, gas is up $1.337 per gallon. Thursday’s record-setting average price is more than a dollar more than the top of the chart the DCCC used to make its claim.

In some states, gas prices are higher than the hourly minimum wage.

From Townhall:

According to GasBuddy, there are 15 stations where gas costs more than $7.25

Didn’t Biden promise to “build back better”? I guess not our energy sector, huh? (Or the border, jobs, economy, inflation, or foreign affairs.)

Gas prices are reaching record highs. The national average is a staggering $4.715. But that is only part of the picture.

The average in some states is much higher. In Illinois, it’s $5.262. In California, it’s $6.213. Some gas stations, depending on local fees and taxes, have prices higher than the federal minimum wage.

Can Biden still blame Putin with a straight face? This is largely thanks to a variety of policies his Energy Department enacted.

Biden banned drilling for oil on federal land. Even after court decisions, he still refuses to lease the land.

On top of that, he implemented harsh emission and refining fees and regulations, increasing the cost companies must spend to provide energy to consumers.

The sanctions on Russia were only the straws that broke the camel’s back. If we had the same policies from Trump, those sanctions would have hardly done a thing.

Meanwhile, Biden’s Energy Department does nothing. Its head literally laughed at a reporter when asked about fixing gas prices.

Biden and his administration are in the hands of radical environmentalists. The last thing they’ll do is lower gas prices.

Key Takeaways:

• Biden once bragged about lowering gas prices by 2 cents.
• Gas prices are now higher than ever, the average being $4.715
• At some stations, gas costs more than the minimum wage.

https://thepatriotjournal.com/months-dem-brag-gas-2-cent/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=actengage&seyid=4716

A top Republican said on Friday that President Joe Biden is raising gas prices on purpose.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) made the remarks when he was asked on Fox Business’s “Wall Street with Maria Bartiromo” to respond to Biden’s recent comments where he said raising gas prices is part of “an incredible transition.”

“I think that’s the main takeaway from his statement, that he is telling the American people they’re doing this to you on purpose, that the transition period is being imposed by policies coming from the Biden administration,” he said.

“This is a conscious effort by the Biden administration to destroy fossil fuel production in the United States, to get away from fossil fuels, and you’re living this experience. This is an irresponsible shutting down of oil and gas production in America, making us more dependent on oil and gas from bad actors, and it’s destroying the American economy,” he continued.

Biden characterized the soaring cost of gasoline in the United States as an “incredible transition” on Monday while taking questions from reporters during his trip to Japan.

“When it comes to the gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels when this is over,” he said alongside Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.

The comment came as the national average cost of a gallon of gas sat at a record-high $4.596, with several states paying more than $6.00.

Biden went on to take credit for gas prices not being “even worse.”

“What I’ve been able to do to keep it from getting even worse—and it’s bad,” he said.

His comments were widely denounced by Republicans.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) criticized Biden for being “completely out of touch with everyday Americans.”

Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel released a statement the following day blaming the Biden administration for the continually elevated cost of gas.

“Another day, another new record high gas price in Biden’s America,” the statement reads. “Joe Biden doesn’t care about the historic inflation and skyrocketing gas prices families are facing every day as a result of his failed agenda. The pain is the point for Biden and Democrats, and Americans will continue to suffer as long as Biden is in charge.”

Biden and other senior administration officials have continually blamed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the inflated gas prices. In response to the invasion on Feb. 24, the United States and many of its Western allies put a halt to all imports of Russian oil and gas.

While the cost of gas did spike dramatically after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, it had already been rising steadily throughout Biden’s first year in office. After the sanctions, the price leveled off before increasing to new record highs in recent weeks.

Nick Ciolino contributed to the report.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-raising-gas-prices-on-purpose-top-republican-says_4497948.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-28-4&utm_medium=email&est=xXRLGdzynM3K%2FEiosQTiDNJip9nCVlN4kd6cDwITr6GxKnFRhe6SpNlhDdkVQsBg9A%3D%3D

Rampant inflation dooms the incumbent, vindicates right-wing economic theories, and sets back the post-war liberal welfare project a generation. Those are not the words of a Wall Street Journal editorial, but of Joe Biden.

They came during an interview in 1987, at the early stages of Biden’s first presidential run. At the time, he lamented voters’ disillusionment with government and large spending proposals associated with the New Deal and Great Society. The skyrocketing inflation that defined the presidencies of Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter, according to Biden, sparked a suspicion of government.

“Government was making the wrong decisions,” Biden told the Atlantic. “As much as 5 or 6 percentage points on the inflation rate were due to oil. Another 5 percent was due to Vietnam. And so you have 10 or 11 percent on top of the inflation that had accumulated since 1932, as conservatives had predicted, and BAM—everything’s gone.”

If those conditions sound familiar, it’s because they are. Inflation is the highest it’s been in 40 years—driven in part by the war in Ukraine, rising oil prices, and an unprecedented amount of federal spending—and it risks completely sinking Biden’s presidency just as they sank Carter’s.

Yet the Biden of the 1970s and the Biden of 2022 might as well be two different people, with the latter challenging economic orthodoxy and alleging that new entitlements and stimulus in the form of Build Back Better will actually bring consumer prices down. As a young, reform-minded senator in the 1970s, Biden introduced bills to slash tens of millions of dollars from what believed were ineffective and useless federal agencies and insisted the only way out of America’s stagflation nightmare was massive spending cuts. His 180-degree change reflects the leftward lurch of a Democratic Party and White House staffed with ideologues (many of whom never lived through the 1970s) able to convince a nearly 80-year-old president that everything he once understood about how the economy worked was completely wrong.

“The taxpayers of this country have been charged $52 million to support 1,500 advisory committees, despite the fact that 397 of these committees have never even met and another 891 have never produced a single report,” Biden said in 1975.

Those positions earned praise from such then-conservative-leaning publications as U.S. News & World Report, which wrote that lawmakers such as Biden “are increasingly disillusioned with Great Society-type programs.”

Biden agreed with that assessment: “We newer liberal Democrats are rejecting the theory of our more senior colleagues, which was that if you spend enough money you can solve any problem,” Biden said in 1972.

Democrats, according to Biden in 1974, had lost focus on who their main constituency should be: the middle class. The persistent inflation that defined that decade convinced the average working man who makes “$12,000 a year” (around $70,000 today) that “he’s been had.” Poor Americans, Biden said, had received an inordinate amount of attention from lawmakers.

When angry truckers appeared in 1973 in Washington, D.C., as part of their nationwide effort to shut down transit in protest of rising gas prices, Biden was one of the few lawmakers who met with them. His appearance at the protest set him apart from more liberal members of the Democratic Party—then-senator George McGovern (S.D.), a former presidential candidate and supposed ally of labor, was nowhere to be found—and helped Biden paint an image of himself as a pragmatist.

A year and a half into his first presidential term, Biden has been dogged by criticism that he’s not doing enough to lower gas prices (as well as by an angry trucking industry with grievances that his White House refuses to acknowledge). Critics point to shutting down pipelines and failing to renew oil licenses on federal lands.

After reviewing then-president Gerald Ford’s budget, Biden expressly attacked the White House for not doing enough to address high gas prices and for its tax hikes on corporations, arguing there were better ways to cool demand. During a Senate hearing in 1974, Biden chastised liberals for forgetting “the vast resources of the ocean and their importance to us … [which] range from lobsters to oil.”

Although Biden called for some tax hikes on the margins, his plan to curb inflation was defined mostly by spending cuts. During his Senate reelection campaign in 1978, Biden took out a full-page advertisement in the News Journal, one of the largest newspapers in his home state of Delaware, to promote his “sunset bill” that would force “a thorough and complete review of federal spending programs every four years … [that] would automatically end a program that wasn’t proved useful or effective.”

The News Journal Tue Oct 24… by Washington Free Beacon

“The spiraling costs of inflation are ripping into the fabric of American society,” the ad reads. “We must bring these problems under control and the first place to start is with the cost of government.”

Biden’s earliest days in the Senate were defined by bills to reduce federal spending. One of the first bills he introduced was to cap pay raises for all federal employees and block automatic cost-of-living adjustments.

By 1978, Biden said he earned the moniker one of the country’s “stingiest senators.” His bills targeted the budgets of the Department of Labor and what was then called the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. He criticized the welfare system as “wasteful” and said it largely functioned as a way “to build political patronage.”

“I plan to keep chopping away—cutting wherever I can—so that eventually, we’re going to bring the monstrous federal budget under control,” Biden said during his first term in the Senate. “It’ll take time, but I know we can do it. We must.”

By 1979, the federal budget deficit was roughly $40.7 billion. In 2022, the federal budget deficit neared $1.4 trillion—an increase of $500 billion since 2019. In 1978, the inflation rate sat at 7.59 percent. Today, it sits at 8.5 percent.

A Gallup poll taken in April 1978—a year and a half into Carter’s term—found that just 39 percent of voters approved of the then-president’s job performance, with the firm concluding that the economy was responsible for Carter’s 9-point drop in one month. In April 2022, Gallup found that 41 percent of voters approved of Biden’s job as president, with a majority concerned about the economy.

One month before the 1978 midterms, Carter gave a televised address to the country on the state of the economy. In a rhetorical maneuver that Biden has also employed, Carter championed the improving labor market and pointed to rising inflation rates across the world.

“We know that government is not the only cause of inflation,” Carter said. “But it is one of the causes, and government does set an example. Therefore, it must take the lead in fiscal restraint.”

Those speeches, like many Carter gave during his only term in the White House, did little to reassure the public. Democrats would end up losing 3 seats in the Senate and 15 in the House.

Although Democrats did not lose control of either chamber of Congress, several Republicans who later led a conservative policy revolution, including Newt Gingrich, gained power. Carter, who afterwards attempted a pivot to the center, in 1980 faced a primary challenge from the left and then lost in the general election to Ronald Reagan.

Confronted with a similarly plummeting approval rating and a grim midterm cycle, party insiders are already speculating on who might replace Biden on the top of the ticket in 2024. An adviser to socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), Biden’s former left-wing rival, said recently Sanders has not ruled out another presidential run.

In a National Journal interview conducted nearly a decade after the 1978 midterms, Biden reflected on the political problems that plagued Democrats.

“There is a consistent pattern that crept into the Democratic Party in the late 1960s and through the 1970s: We forgot who our people were,” Biden said. “The moral business of this country is not the way liberals think of it.”

https://freebeacon.com/politics/how-biden-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to-love-inflation/

 Joe Biden appeared to try to put a positive spin on skyrocketing gas prices Monday while taking questions from reporters during his trip to Japan.

When asked about the economy, inflation, and the record prices Americans continue to pay at the pump, Biden characterized the increased cost of gasoline as an “incredible transition.”

“When it comes to the gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels when this is over,” Biden said alongside Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishid.

The comment came as the national average cost of a gallon of gas sat at a record-high $4.596, with several states paying more than $6.00.

Biden went on to take credit for gas prices not being “even worse.”

“What I’ve been able to do to keep it from getting even worse—and it’s bad,” he said.

Speaking to broader concerns about food shortages, inflation, and other poor economic indicators both domestically and abroad, Biden suggested the problems will likely persist when he said, “This is going to be a haul.”

But when asked if he thought the United States would soon be entering a recession, the president responded “no.”

Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel released a statement the following day blaming the Biden administration for the continually elevated cost of gas.

“Another day, another new record high gas price in Biden’s America,” the statement reads. “Joe Biden doesn’t care about the historic inflation and skyrocketing gas prices families are facing everyday as a result of his failed agenda. The pain is the point for Biden and Democrats, and Americans will continue to suffer as long as Biden is in charge.”

Biden and other senior administration officials have continually blamed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the inflated gas prices. In response to the invasion on Feb. 24, the United States and many of its Western allies put a halt to all imports of Russian oil and gas.

While the cost of gas did spike dramatically after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, it had already been rising steadily throughout Biden’s first year in office. After the sanctions, the price leveled off before increasing to new record highs in recent weeks.

In an apparent attempt to rein in the cost of gas back in March, Biden announced the release of an unprecedented 180 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

“It’s helped, but it’s not been enough,” Biden said Monday.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-rising-gas-prices-an-incredible-transition_4487226.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-24-3&utm_medium=email&est=3b7il14J3LFrjW5SqS7XgLecQfP5JIZthgP6dOgCzrKT%2B92x7W35UcwPPsDsHHs0Eg%3D%3D

Alaskans dispute Biden admin claim that industry was not interested

As gas prices continue to break records, the Biden administration’s cancellation of two lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and one lease sale in Alaska’s Cook Inlet has drawn clashing responses, including an accusation that the administration is “blatantly lying.”

One political figure who weighed in was Donald Trump Jr., who recently campaigned with successful Republican Senate primary candidate J.D. Vance in Ohio.

“Looks like Joe is doing a great job of making inflation his top priority,” he wrote in a tweet.

The Cook Inlet oil and gas lease would have covered 1.09 million acres in the Cook Inlet, a body of water connecting Anchorage with the Gulf of Alaska.

A spokesperson for the Department of the Interior told The Epoch Times the Cook Inlet sale was canceled due to a “lack of industry interest in the area.”

“I’m not sure that’s completely accurate,” Kara Moriarty, president and CEO of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association (AOGA), told The Epoch Times.

“A lot of times, companies don’t want to tip their hand about participating in lease sales. The only time you really know if there’s interest or not is when you have the lease sale.”

“As the former Natural Resources Commissioner for Alaska, I know there is no way they could have confirmed ‘no interest’ until they held the lease sale,” said Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), who said the Biden administration was “blatantly lying to the American people.”

Both he and Moriarty referenced correspondence on the Cook Inlet sale from AOGA, which represents more than a dozen oil and gas producers in Alaska, as evidence of industry interest.

“The nature by which this announcement came to news—from the White House’s ultra-left climate czar Gina McCarthy, just down the hall from the president, [and] not the Department of Interior—raises further questions over who is crafting these disastrous energy policies,” Sullivan said, referencing the accidental email to a CBS reporter from a Biden administration official that first revealed the Cook Inlet lease’s cancellation.

Moriarty told The Epoch Times that “baffling is the nicest word I can come up with” for the cancellation.

Some local environmentalists, by contrast, expressed strong support for the decision.

“I’m very excited that we aren’t going to see an oil and gas lease sale that would really hurt our local economy,” Liz Mering told The Epoch Times.

Mering is advocacy director and inletkeeper of Cook InletKeeper, an Alaskan group opposed to oil and gas leasing in the region. Its website states that it seeks to “accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to an equitable, renewable energy future.”

The Interior spokesperson told The Epoch Times that the two Gulf of Mexico leases were canceled because of “delays due to factors including conflicting court rulings that impacted work on these proposed lease sales.”

In June 2021, Louisiana federal Judge James Cain, a Trump appointee, struck down the Biden administration’s pause on oil and gas leases. That pause had commenced with Executive Order 14008.

Yet in January, District of Columbia federal Judge Rudolph Contreras, an Obama appointee, ruled that the November 2021 federal offshore oil and gas sale, the largest in history, was invalid. He argued it violated the National Environmental Policy Act because it didn’t take greenhouse gas emissions into account. The Biden administration didn’t appeal the ruling.

The administration announced its plans to resume lease sales in March after an appeals court ruled it could incorporate a raised “social cost of carbon” factor when assessing permits.

When he was a presidential candidate, Biden’s promises included “banning new oil and gas permitting on public lands and waters.”

The latest lease cancellations come as inflation and high gas prices wrack the nation.

AAA reported that regular gas on May 12 averaged $4.418 a gallon, the highest average price it has ever recorded.

Diesel is also at the highest price point ever recorded by AAA, averaging $5.557 a gallon.

“Prices for gasoline, diesel, and other products are high and climbing. Further, those high prices are raising the cost of other goods and services, and here we are with extraordinarily high rates of inflation at both the consumer and producer levels. The actions of this administration suggest little relief anytime soon,” energy economist Karr Ingham told The Epoch Times.

He said Biden hasn’t yet provided the next legally mandated five-year offshore leasing plan. The current plan ends in June.

“At this late hour, were they to set this new plan in motion today, it would be a year or so before it is in place. That means a significant gap in the time period during which companies may be able to reasonably make plans and allocate capital to drill new projects in these areas. So, in many respects, these canceled leases were the ‘last hurrah’ before that plan expires.”

Lawmakers in Impacted States React

Senators and representatives from Louisiana and Alaska, two states affected by the cancellations, have voiced anger and disgust.

“Pres. Biden has killed more energy lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico. He’s killing jobs, has killed America’s energy independence, and is fueling inflation that is killing Louisiana families. And he’s doing it on purpose,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) wrote in a May 12 tweet.

Kennedy’s senior colleague, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), voiced his concerns in similar language.

“President Biden’s administration is actively making high gas prices worse,” Cassidy said. “When we need to unleash American energy production, the Biden administration kills opportunities at every turn.”

“Rather than using American energy sources to help solve the problem and lower prices, the Biden administration continues to carry out policies that only benefit Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and other apparent allies of this White House. It is past time for the administration to put Americans first,” said Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.), who serves on the House Natural Resources committee.

Sullivan said: “The timing and nature of this decision display a disturbing disregard for the pain American families continue to feel at the pump, for the hard-working Americans whose livelihoods and communities depend on the American energy industry, and for the grave consequences, these policies have on America’s energy and national security. As Gina McCarthy celebrates this decision from the White House, rest assured Vladimir Putin is popping corks in the Kremlin.”

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) hasn’t yet commented on the decision.

The Epoch Times has also reached out to the only Democrat representing Louisiana, Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.).

Different Views From Environmental Activists and Industry

Some environmentalists in and around the Cook Inlet celebrated the cancellation.

“There’s a lot of tourism industry that would be really harmed by this lease sale,” Mering said.

She said locals have fought oil and gas activity in the area since the 1970s when Cook Inlet’s Kachemak Bay was protected from drilling enabled by state leases. Commercial fishermen helped lead that pushback.

“There has to be more and more pushback as climate change hits Alaska.”

Moriarty noted that the Cook Inlet has been producing oil and gas for six decades. It generated 293,000 barrels of oil in March. All the oil produced in Cook Inlet is refined at the nearby Nikiski refinery.

“There’s no evidence that production from Cook Inlet has hampered our ability to coexist with commercial and sport fishing interests,” Moriarty said, arguing that oil and gas had helped diversify the Kenai Peninsula’s economy beyond the norm in Alaska.

Referencing the fight over oil in the 1970s, she said that “trying to pick out one incident negates the longstanding tradition we have of coexisting in Cook Inlet.”

Yet environmental activists present a contrasting narrative.

“This news means that the waters of lower Cook Inlet, which nourish the Gulf of Alaska as well as a watershed the size of Virginia, will continue the essential ecological function they’ve served since the last ice age. The people of this region who fought this lease sale will also continue their role in the ecology of placemaking, honoring our collective dependence on clean water,” said environmental activist Marissa Wilson of the Alaska Marine Conservation Council.

Josh Wisniewski, a fisherman in the Lower Cook Inlet, also praised the decision.

“Our fisheries, our quality of life, and regional economy depend on the health of this wild landscape we are privileged to live in. We now have the chance to build on this moment and seek a permanent withdrawal of this region from all future oil and gas lease sales to protect our home waters for future generations.”

In an interview with The Epoch Times, Wisniewski conceded that oil and gas are currently valuable to the larger state but argued that it “doesn’t make sense in this particular context.”

“We’ve got existing oil and gas infrastructure in different places.”

Yet AOGA’s Moriarty argued that Cook Inlet’s production is particularly critical for use within Alaska, including for jet fuel at Ted Stevens International Airport.

“We should be thinking about, ‘How do we get our next barrels of oil from the United States?’” Moriarty said, arguing that greater energy independence was vital to national security.

“The U.S. supplies the cleanest barrels of any major producer on the globe. U.S. greenhouse gas emissions have been declining steadily for more than two decades now and continue to do so,” said energy economist Ingham.

“Constricting U.S. production in no way means those barrels will not be consumed—it just means those barrels will come from somewhere else, and that somewhere else will not produce that oil nearly as cleanly as the United States.”

He speculated about the motives of Earthjustice, which praised the cancellations as “good for the climate” in CBS coverage.

“Is Earthjustice in favor of acquiring America’s energy needs from countries and regions who produce dirtier barrels than the United States? Or are they simply anti-U.S. oil and gas, and ultimately, anti U.S.-consumer?”

The Epoch Times has also reached out to the Environmental Defense Fund, often seen as a left-wing environmental group, and to the Property and Environmental Research Center, a free-market environmental group.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-oil-and-gas-lease-sale-cancellations-draw-strong-reaction_4463768.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-13-2&utm_medium=email&est=eQCPOhyZQtYitmSHlZvE2C2tFw6OVYRtSuzfZs7eeZUgbmst8ULZANyfKj24eCbVMw%3D%3D

The Lenin Scholar is slated for a confirmation hearing Thursday

President Joe Biden’s nominee to regulate banks stole hundreds of dollars of merchandise from a discount retail store, according to a police report revealed Wednesday.

Saule Omarova, whom Biden tapped to serve as Comptroller of the Currency, was arrested after she was caught stuffing $214 worth of clothes, shoes, cologne, and belts in her purse at a T.J. Maxx in Madison, Wis., in May 1995. Omarova was 28 years old at the time and studying for her doctorate at the University of Wisconsin.

Omarova is slated to appear before the Senate Banking Committee for her confirmation hearing Thursday. If confirmed, Omarova will oversee regulation of the country’s banking system. The police report, published by the American Accountability Foundation, could get her into further hot water with Senate Republicans who say she supports radical economic policies.

Sen. Pat Toomey (R., Pa.), the ranking member of the Senate Banking Committee, has pressed Omarova to turn over a copy of a thesis she wrote on Karl Marx while studying at Moscow State University in the late 1980s. Omarova, who attended the school on a Lenin scholarship, scrubbed her résumé of a reference to the Marx thesis at some point over the last few years.

Omarova, a professor at the Cornell Law School, has said she wants to “end banking as we know it” by requiring bank deposits to be held with the Federal Reserve, rather than private banks. Omarova has also proposed the creation of a federal agency, the National Investment Authority, that would fulfill the goals of the Green New Deal by investing in infrastructure projects. Omarova said one goal of the National Investment Authority would be for oil and gas companies to go “bankrupt” in order to fight climate change.

Omarova will likely need unanimous Democratic support in order to be confirmed, but some moderates have expressed concern about her views. Sen. Jon Tester (D., Mont.), a member of the Senate Banking Committee, said he has not decided whether he will vote to confirm Omarova. Sens. Joe Manchin (D., W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) are reportedly on the fence about her nomination.

The White House downplayed the theft allegations against Omarova in a statement to Fox News prior to the release of the police report. A White House spokesperson said Omarova has been “fully transparent” about the incident by disclosing it to the Senate Banking Committee, and that her arrest was the result “of a misunderstanding and confusing situation.”

The police report contradicts that claim. According to the report, Omarova “admitted to have stolen the items,” which consisted of four pairs of shoes, two bottles of cologne, two belts, and a pair of socks.

Omarova did not respond to a request for comment.

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/saule-omarova-stole-hundreds-of-dollars-of-merchandise-from-a-t-j-maxx/

President Joe Biden’s nominee for comptroller of the currency, a critical federal official charged with overseeing large banks, declared war on the fossil fuel industry: “We want them to go bankrupt,” said Saule Omarova.

Omarova isn’t alone in her desire for financial institutions to discriminate against the energy producers that make their existence possible. Progressive activists and Wall Street financiers are teaming up to promote environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing practices that place political whims on a pedestal—at the expense of our lives and livelihoods.

The Biden administration’s endorsement of this brazen anti-energy movement threatens Americans’ money and future—and could have unsettling ripple effects throughout our economy.

Here’s how it works: Pension funds invest the money of retirees and future retirees. Fund managers should make the smartest investments they can in order to ensure retirees have enough money to live on. But under ESG, they’re not making the smartest investments, they’re making investments that align with their political ideology. If that’s not bad enough, they’ll vote with a small but vocal minority of activist shareholders to adopt resolutions or replace board members—often against the best interests of the majority of shareholders.

Take ExxonMobil, for example. An activist hedge fund called Engine No. 1, which owns just 0.02 percent of Exxon’s shares, forced a takeover and replaced three board members with climate alarmists who will advocate for expensive and ineffective greenhouse gas reduction programs instead of working for the good of Exxon and all its shareholders. 

Energy discrimination through ESG investing threatens to withhold capital and discourage investing in companies deemed politically unpalatable by progressives. This, of course, primarily means energy producers—regardless of the fact that America provides fuel for the world using the best pollution control technology available, not to mention fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

Discrimination against the businesses powering America has advanced primarily through activists’ public shaming campaigns and big corporations’ virtue-signaling PR angles, but the elite class wants to force American businesses to march in lockstep on climate change. Pushing ESG from the federal level is an arbitrary and indefensible restriction on free speech and a threat to the men and women depending on their investments and pensions for retirement—that’s the vast majority of us.

Activists claim that ESG funds—those branded as having a better social impact, though there are no universal standards that define ESG—perform better financially than traditional investments. However, studies supporting this claim are riddled with methodological errors, and this trend is simply too new to understand long-term effects.

Selecting investments based on political preferences, no matter how seemingly virtuous, goes against decades of investing wisdom. Diversified investments are almost universally agreed to be the strongest investments long-term, which means that limiting investment opportunities for retirement funds and pensions will also limit the return on investment for retirees.

One well-constructed study reveals this by analyzing higher education investments. Professor Daniel R. Fischel finds (pdf) that the cost of complying with energy discrimination campaigns is significant enough to prevent universities from reaching their investment goals. Higher fees, limited diversification, and compliance costs add up—and likely don’t influence the public’s behavior or opinions.

Worse yet, recent legal analysis suggests ESG investing may actually rise to the level of illegal collusion that violates longstanding consumer protection laws. When all the major players are conspiring to follow the same political practices, to the extent that law-abiding businesses can’t access financial services, the free market is no longer truly free.

But do these principles help stop climate change? The answer is categorically no. According to climate data models used globally, even enacting each and every tenet of the Green New Deal wouldn’t produce any meaningful temperature change. Eliminating all fossil fuels and all man-made carbon dioxide emissions would result in less than two-tenths of a degree temperature difference. So even the biggest and loudest campaigns to force divestment from fossil fuels would have a microscopic impact—if any at all.

The only real effect of this energy discrimination movement would be worse poverty, a higher cost of living for everyone, and—ironically—more pollution. That’s because denying capital or investments to American energy companies won’t eliminate our need for fossil fuels, our only significant source of the affordable, reliable energy we need. It will just transfer energy purchases to overseas producers.

It makes little sense, if the environment is really the progressive wing’s top priority, to give power, influence, and money to countries that pollute with abandon and maintain poor human rights records. Instead, we should continue to produce energy here in the United States, taking advantage of our environmentally conscious and efficient energy industry—while also producing energy cheaply and maintaining our national security and international negotiating power.

Biden campaigned on equity and fighting poverty. Unfortunately, his administration’s fixation on climate alarmism and micromanaging investors will create more poverty by making energy—and everything we buy—more expensive.

The Biden administration should reject discrimination of all forms, including energy discrimination.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wall-streets-energy-discrimination-will-hurt-america_4108504.html

The Biden administration conveyed its intention Monday to pause new oil and gas drilling for twenty years within a ten-mile radius of the Chaco Canyon National Historical Park, which already prohibits oil and gas drilling within its borders, drawing objections from the 24th Navajo Nation Council, which represents allottees of oil and gas leasing within the perimeter and which favors a five-mile protective radius instead.

Chaco Canyon National Historical Park, which is also a UNESCO World Heritage Site and an International Dark Sky Park, contains structures inhabited by the ancient Puebloan peoples from roughly 850 to 1250 AD.

The administration’s announcement comes after Congress approved a one-year ban on oil and gas leasing within a ten-mile perimeter of the park as part of the 2021 spending bill passed in December 2020.

According to a press release from the Department of the Interior, the proposed move “would not affect existing valid leases or rights and would not apply to minerals owned by private, State, or Tribal entities.”

Yet the Navajo Nation Resources and Development Committee Chair Rickie Nez, representing the Navajo communities of T’iistsoh Sikaad, Nenahnezad, Upper Fruitland, Tsé Daa K’aan, Newcomb, and San Juan, expressed concern about the pause’s impact on Navajo allotment owners who may wish to open their land to oil and gas development.

“We must ensure the livelihood of Navajo allotted land owners in the greater Chaco Canyon area are maintained. The Navajo Nation through a resolution has provided a compromise to also protect this sacred area from mineral development. The Biden Administration has to work with us to find a solution that meets our needs and that is this 5-mile buffer zone,” Nez said in a press release from the Navajo Council.

“Tribal nations do better when they make their own decisions,” Biden said before mentioning the proposal for the ten-mile buffer zone as part of his remarks to the White House Tribal Nations Summit.

In Interior’s press release, Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Bryan Newland said the proposal was “a great example of how Tribally-led conservation can advance the nation’s goal of addressing climate change.”

Navajo Council Speaker Seth Damon, representing the communities of Bááhaalí, Chichiltah, Manuelito, Red Rock, Rock Springs, and Tséyatoh, had a different perspective.

“The Biden Administration bypassed previous requests to Congress for field hearings and for leaders to hear directly from our Navajo families affected in the Chaco Canyon region,” said Damon as part of the Navajo Council press release.

“It is important that the federal government consider and work with our Navajo allottees to further advance development. The Administration must respect our tribal sovereignty and what the government to government relationship entails,” he added.

His concerns were echoed by Mark Freeland, a Navajo council delegate representing the communities of Becenti, Lake Valley, Náhodishgish, Standing Rock, Whiterock, Huerfano, Nageezi, and Crownpoint.

“The Interior Department unilaterally made this withdrawal proposal without proper tribal consultation, now directly affecting our families on the Navajo Nation,” said Freeland in the press release.

By contrast, the All Pueblo Council of Governors (APCG), composed of the leaders of New Mexico and Texas’s twenty Pueblo nations, voiced its strong support for the Biden administration’s move, which it argued would protect vital artifacts and heritage from the ancient Pueblo and other tribes.

“On behalf of the 20 Pueblo Governors, we are overjoyed by the actions of President Biden and grateful to Secretary [Deb] Haaland for honoring the responsibility of each Pueblo Leader to protect Pueblo culture. Today’s announcement is the result of continuous prayers and the commitment to steward mother earth, our Sacred Trust,” said Wilfred Herrera, Jr., chairman of the APCG and former governor of the Laguna Pueblo nation, as part of an APCG press release.

Interior Secretary Haaland, the first top executive branch official of Native American ancestry since Charles Curtis served as vice president to Herbert Hoover, also belongs to the Laguna Pueblo nation.

A spokesperson for the APCG stated it did not have sufficient time to answer more detailed questions from The Epoch Times about the move, including the Navajo Nation’s concerns with it.

Rep. Paul Gosar (R.-Az.) and other Republican congressmen also objected to the move.

“Today’s latest land grab by the Biden administration will strip hundreds of Navajo Allottees of their rights to their lands by imposing an unscientific and overreaching buffer around Chaco Canyon. We heard from these allottees directly and urged the DOI to listen and reject this reckless policy. This action is another attack on America’s energy independence by the Biden administration. They are determined to shut down federal lands to all energy development while begging foreign countries for more oil. Americans reject this America Last policy,” Gosar said.

“Clearly President Biden prefers relying on our foreign adversaries for essential energy rather than domestic producers,” said Rep. Bruce Westerman (R.-Ark.)

The disagreement over lands near Chaco Canyon is one skirmish among many in the long-running conflict between Democrats and Republicans over the future of fossil fuels.

In April 2020, as COVID-19 lockdowns throttled the nation’s economy, Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D.-N.Y.) responded to a tweet about oil prices going negative by tweeting that “you absolutely love to see it.”

Ocasio-Cortez later deleted her tweet.

At an October meeting of the House Committee on Natural Resources, Ranking Member Westerman challenged Democrats on the committee to speak up if they did not ultimately seek to end domestic oil and gas production altogether.

No Democrats spoke up.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/navajo-nation-fights-back-against-biden-administrations-move-to-restrict-drilling-near-chaco-canyon_4105875.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-11-16-3&mktids=19b71a18688f3b135db9068295caff6c&est=FW5qXfwrI1TNkebcmWebpMiZ5VxLlxjb4gFyPNx%2B7r4Vu065gMCPLBUybcyaA%2B4gLA%3D%3D

Mitch Landrieu will oversee $1.2 trillion in infrastructure spending

President Joe Biden’s pick to oversee $1.2 trillion in infrastructure spending is a top adviser to a trade organization that seeks Chinese investment in American infrastructure.

Mitch Landrieu serves as strategic adviser to the United States China Heartland Association, which supports cultural and business exchange between China and 20 states in the American heartland. The association frequently partners with Chinese Communist Party front groups that operate abroad.

Landrieu’s position with the Heartland Association could raise eyebrows given the organization’s promotion of Chinese investment in domestic infrastructure projects. American officials have expressed concern that the Chinese government and state-linked companies use infrastructure investments in foreign countries to influence policy abroad. Heartland Association chairman Bob Holden, the former Democratic governor of Missouri, this year urged Chinese investment in U.S. infrastructure, saying it presents a “win-win” for both sides.

Landrieu is an unpaid adviser to the Heartland Association, according to Executive Director Min Fan. Fan said that the association’s advisers—a list that includes Export-Import Bank nominee Reta Jo Lewis—”are all Governor Holden’s friends who agreed to be consulted when we need their advice.” Fan told the Washington Free Beacon that she is not aware of Landrieu’s providing any advice to the Heartland Association.

Biden on Sunday appointed Landrieu, the former Democratic mayor of New Orleans, to serve as infrastructure coordinator, a position in which he will supervise spending on roads, bridges, ports, and other infrastructure across the country. The White House says Landrieu’s work on rebuilding New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina makes him qualified for the post.

The Heartland Association has worked closely with two Chinese Communist Party organizations, the China-United States Exchange Foundation and the Chinese People’s Association for Relations with Foreign Countries. An executive with the China-United States Exchange Foundation serves on the Heartland Association’s board of directors.

CIA director William Burns testified this year that in his previous role as president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, he severed ties with the Exchange Foundation because of its efforts to influence American policymakers. Former secretary of state Mike Pompeo last year cancelled a diplomatic event sponsored by the Chinese People’s Association for Relations with Foreign Countries, saying the group sought to “malignly influence” state and local leaders to advance China’s foreign policy goals.

While the Heartland Association does not disclose its financial backers, the group has touted partnerships with Chinese automotive glass maker Fuyao Group and solar panel maker Wanxiang New America.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security/biden-infrastructure-czar-advises-pro-china-group/

Administration says it will overcome opposition

President Joe Biden’s latest some $2 trillion social spending plan will add trillions to the national debt, make inflation worse, and hurt traditional energy businesses. These were the contentions of a group of Heritage Foundation policy scholars.

During a press briefing on Nov. 12, they reviewed the president’s Build Back Better policies.

The original Build Back Better proposal called for $4 trillion in spending. Some progressives said it was not big enough. But opposition from Senator Manchin (D-W.Va.) required the proposal’s price tag come down.

Heritage Foundation experts lambasted both the recently passed $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill and the latest $1.75+ trillion social and environmental spending proposal. The latter is pending in Congress.

“The White House’s newly released framework,” the Heritage Foundation said in a statement, “returns to a tried-and-true way to obscure the true cost of the legislation: the budget gimmick. Progressives claim the bill is a compromise when in reality, it is a profoundly radical document that would massively expand federal power, promote a variety of left-wing causes, kneecap the economic recovery, and waste a tremendous amount of taxpayer money.”

The White House Press Office didn’t respond to requests for comment.

At the same time, a high Biden administration was recently predicting the latest package would pass Congress, which might take up the issue next week. Still, Heritage Foundation officials said it would be toxic.

Katie Tubb, an energy analyst, warned that spending billions of dollars proposed for alternative energy companies would repeat the mistakes of the Obama administration, which spent billions of taxpayer dollars on loan guarantees for the Solyndra solar energy company. The company later defaulted.

“I’m not sure why we are expecting this to be any different this time around,” she said.

Tubb contended much of the economic growth over the last few years has come from traditional energy sources. This Biden plan, she added, would punish those industries.

“Why is that important? Because Americans get 80 percent of their energy from traditional sources such as coal, oil, and natural gas,” she said.

Tubb argued, “these are legal industries in the United States that contribute to the wellbeing of the United States, yet you wouldn’t know this by the way this administration talks.”

Tubb warns Build Back Better policies conflict with most of the president’s constituents “because, as you increase energy prices, you increase the cost of almost every product and service.”

She also said Build Back Better would hurt right to work states, states in which workers can’t be required to join unions.

This Biden’s original social spending proposal included $555 billion for environmental programs and $400 billion to pay for universal pre-school and cap child care costs at seven percent of income for most families and $200 billion to expand the child tax credit for families that earn up to $150,000 from $2,000 to $3,000 per child or $3,600 for those under age 6.

Several Heritage Foundation officials also complained that the five infrastructure/stimulus plans that have been passed since the outbreak of COVID last year are too much. And while one or two of these packages may have been justified, they are now excessive, they said. They are adding too much to the debt and will hurt efforts of some private sector firms to recover, especially in the energy sector, they noted.

David Ditch, a Heritage Foundation federal budget policy analyst, said the latest Biden plan is part of a number of spending plans since the start of the pandemic that have “already added $5 trillion to the national debt.”

It would also be the “greatest expansion” of government welfare programs in history, according to Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation analyst.

“The deficit spending has consequences because we have massive structural consequences that will keep growing,” Ditch contended.

“There’s also no way to escape the fact that Build Back Better would increase deficits in the first five years. It’s really important to understand that every important economic headwind we face now would be worsened by Build Back Better,” according to Ditch.

Rachel Greszler, another Heritage Foundation analyst, said most of the Biden child care programs discourage the use of religious, or faith-based, child-care programs.

“To qualify, they would have to take most of the faith out of their programs. None of them are going to do that because the reason they set them up was to be in line with their faith.”

She also said the proposal will primarily benefit urban “high income families” at the “expense of more rural low-income areas.”

Still, a Biden administration official on Nov. 11 said the $2 trillion proposal is in good shape. Vice President Kamala Harris, in a speech in France, predicted the package “is poised to pass soon.”

“Just before I traveled here,” Harris added, “our Congress passed a landmark piece of legislation to make a historic investment in our nation’s infrastructure. Another bill that will support our nation’s working families and help us meet our climate commitment is poised to pass soon.”

High oil prices are a symptom of economic and monetary imbalances, not a consequence of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) decisions.

Throughout history, we have seen how OPEC cuts have done little to elevate prices when diversification and technology added to rising efficiency. Likewise, OPEC output increases don’t necessarily mean lower prices, let alone reasonable ones. OPEC helps but doesn’t solve price issues, even if they would probably like to.

The problem in the oil market has been created by years of massive capital misallocation and underinvestment in energy—the result of extremely loose monetary policies directed by governments that have penalized capital expenditure on fossil fuels for ideological reasons.

Misguided activism and political nudging in the middle of monetary injections have created bottlenecks and underinvestment that hinder both security of supply and a technically feasible competitive energy transition.

Massive injections of liquidity have caused a double side effect: rising malinvestment in non-productive activities and, now, a large inflow of capital into so-called “value” areas—more money directed to relatively scarce assets. Energy has gone from a consensus underweight stock rating to a large overweight, exacerbating the price increase. The marginal barrel of oil has risen almost 60 percent in a year, despite supply rising in tandem with demand.

According to JP Morgan, the required capital expenditure in energy required to meet demand is $600 billion for the period 2021–2030. This “cumulative missing capex” is part of the problem.

The other important problem is artificial demand created by chains of stimulus plans. As I explained in this column, adding enormous energy-intensive infrastructure plans to a re-opening economy where some supply bottlenecks have been worsened generates the same effect on energy prices as a huge speculative bubble.

Political intervention has also created an important impact on the price of a marginal barrel of oil. Threatening to ban domestic development of energy resources in the United States or announcing the prohibition of fossil fuel investment in some European summits makes the net present value of the long-term marginal barrel higher, not lower. Why? Because those threats aren’t made with sound technical analysis and robust supply and demand estimates, but with political agendas. Any serious engineer that understands the importance of security and supply and technology development understands that a successful energy transition to a greener economy requires solid and realistic targets and policies that avoid an energy crisis. Those have been forgotten.

OPEC is benefitting from high oil prices, but not as much as one would think. The OPEC Reference Basket average is $68.33 per barrel year-to-date, a large 68.4 percent increase over the same period last year, but still massively below the elevated levels prior to the 2008 financial crisis. Furthermore, OPEC and non-OPEC supply has risen in tandem with demand. Global oil supply in October increased by 1.74 million barrels per day to average 97.56 million barrels per day compared with the previous month. The U.S. liquids production growth forecast for 2021 has been revised up by 19,000 barrels per day and expected to be 17.57 million barrels per day in 2021. Imagine where oil and gas prices would be if the political threats to ban or severely penalize domestic production had been enforced.

Let’s not forget that OPEC has also revised down the estimates of global oil demand to 96.4 million barrels a day in 2021. Supply remains ample, and the U.S. administration should see that Russia and the United States are expected to be the main drivers of next year’s supply growth. Without Russia and the United States, production prices would soar no matter what OPEC partners or Saudi Arabia alone do.

We’re suffering the combination of misguided energy policies, excessive money creation, and ill-timed giant construction plans. OPEC and its partner Russia may alleviate this, but not change it dramatically. Furthermore, as time passes and underinvestment becomes more severe, OPEC’s ability to curb prices weakens. We can’t forget that OPEC and Russia account for less than half of the total world supply. They matter, but putting two more million barrels a day of supply into the market doesn’t solve the long-term price problem.

Energy prices will decline with more technology, investment, and diversification, not empty political threats.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/opec-is-not-the-only-solution-to-high-oil-prices_4103287.html

For most Americans, the first 10 months of the Biden administration have been a disaster. A new report suggests Vice President Kamala Harris is one of those Americans who is suffering through the administration’s incompetence.

West Wing aides are growing increasingly frustrated with “entrenched dysfunction and lack of focus” from Harris and her staff, CNN reported Sunday. The outlet interviewed almost three dozen current and former staffers for Harris, administration officials, donors, advisers and Democratic Party operatives, and they reportedly painted a discouraging picture.

“Harris is struggling with a rocky relationship with some parts of the White House, while long-time supporters feel abandoned and see no coherent public sense of what she’s done or been trying to do as vice president,” CNN reported.

At the same time, the outlet said Harris’ supporters are equally frustrated with White House officials who they feel are not putting Harris in a position to succeed.

“Kamala Harris is a leader but is not being put in positions to lead,” a top donor to President Joe Biden said. “That doesn’t make sense. We need to be thinking long term, and we need to be doing what’s best for the party.

CNN’s Stelter Shows How Insulated He Is by Media Bubble with Clueless Supply Chain Tweet

“You should be putting her in positions to succeed, as opposed to putting weights on her,” he said, speaking indirectly to Biden. “If you did give her the ability to step up and help her lead, it would strengthen you and strengthen the party.”

However, when the president has given Harris a chance to lead, she has largely failed to do so.

He tapped Harris to lead the response to the border crisis in March, The Associated Press reported. Since then, Harris has visited the border just one time, and it was far from the areas where illegal immigration is at its highest.

Border agents are still facing huge numbers of illegal border crossings, some of which are committed by convicted criminals.

Do you think Harris will run for president in 2024?

But according to a former aide to Harris, her sinking approval rating is not due to her own failures, but rather systemic racism within the Biden administration.

“It’s hard to miss the specific energy that the White House brings to defend a white man, knowing that Kamala Harris has spent almost a year taking a lot of the hits that the West Wing didn’t want to take themselves,” the aide said.

These comments show just how dysfunctional the relationship between Biden and Harris is. Members of Biden’s own party are turning on him and accusing him of racism because of the incompetence of his administration and particularly his vice president.

Obviously, none of this is helpful optically to an administration that is already floundering. For that reason, multiple White House staffers attempted to cover for Harris after the damming report.

“For anyone who needs to hear it. @VP is not only a vital partner to @POTUS but a bold leader who has taken on key, important challenges facing the country — from voting rights to addressing root causes of migration to expanding broadband,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki tweeted Sunday night.

Left Plays Blame Game as Harris’ Approval Rating Drops to Historic Low, Gives Laughable Excuse

For anyone who needs to hear it. @VP is not only a vital partner to @POTUS but a bold leader who has taken on key, important challenges facing the country—from voting rights to addressing root causes of migration to expanding broadband.

— Jen Psaki (@PressSec) November 15, 2021

White House chief of staff Ronald Klain also joined in on the action by retweeting a sycophantic celebration of Harris from Mayor Robert Garcia of Long Beach, California.

“Our @VP Kamala Harris just finished a highly successful trip where she strengthened diplomatic relationships,” the tweet said. “She takes on the most complex assignments because she’s capable and smart. She’s a great leader who also happens to be funny and kind. And that’s the tweet.”

Our @VP Kamala Harris just finished a highly successful trip where she strengthened diplomatic relationships. She takes on the most complex assignments because she’s capable and smart. She’s a great leader who also happens to be funny and kind. And that’s the tweet.

— Robert Garcia (@RobertGarcia) November 15, 2021

Scramble as they might, those within the walls of the White House cannot hide their dysfunction forever. Americans are growing increasingly tired of Biden, Harris and the entire administration just 10 months into it, and tensions are rising between its own members.

As House Democrats continue trying to muster enough votes to pass President Joe Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, said that the massive social spending bill—along with other Democrat-led policies—represent a “potentially fatal overdose of government” that could stifle free enterprise and push inflation higher.

Davidson, who serves co-chairman of the Congressional Sound Money Caucus, told NTD News in an interview that the Biden administration’s big-ticket spending proposals risk exacerbating inflation, which is running at a near 31-year high.

“The only debate on Capitol Hill is how much more gas to throw on the fire,” Davidson said.

“It gets bigger, and that’s the Democrats’ agenda—they want to throw more on with Build Back Better,” he said, adding that “it’s going to dump a lot of extra spending into the economy and it has a big impact” on inflation.

“Whether you’re talking about the American Rescue Plan, the infrastructure bill or Build Back Better—all part of this Bernie Sanders’ agenda,” Davidson said, alluding to the Vermont senator’s various left-leaning or far-left policy positions, including proposing to cut the wealth of billionaires by half over 15 years and initially putting forward a $6 trillion budget proposal that he said was “probably too little.”

“It is hostile to the American way of life and free enterprise. We’re confronting a potentially fatal overdose of government. We need more freedom and less government—and we need to embrace sound money,” Davidson said.

President Joe Biden has argued that his Build Back Better plan will ease inflationary pressures, including on the labor cost side by getting more Americans back into the workforce by reducing child and elder care costs. And more directly, his plan would lower costs for families by providing more affordable health coverage and prescription drugs, he said.

In a similar vein, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen told CNBC in late October that the Build Back Better agenda would have an anti-inflationary impact by smoothing some supply-side dislocations and footing the bill for some costs facing American families.

“It will boost the economy’s potential to grow, the economy’s supply potential, which tends to push inflation down, not up,” she told the outlet.

“For many American families experiencing inflation, seeing the prices of gas and other things that they buy rise, what this package will do is lower some of the most important costs, what they pay for health care, for child care. It’s anti-inflationary in that sense as well,” Yellen added.

Yellen also said she continues to see inflation as a temporary supply-side-driven phenomenon that will normalize next year.

Davidson challenged the “transitory” inflation framing, noting that the Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned from around $4 trillion in the months prior to the outbreak of the pandemic to over $8 trillion.

“When you create that much cash into the economy, of course it shows up,” he said, adding that, initially, people were “happy” to see their financial assets grow in value, “but then you start seeing it in retail prices, and that’s what we’re seeing today.”

“This is not going to be transitory.”

https://www.theepochtimes.com/america-facing-potentially-fatal-overdose-of-government-rep-davidson_4102288.html

Creating more government jobs is an expense (AKA subsidy), not a benefit. Do less with more. [US Patriot]

WASHINGTON—The U.S. infrastructure bill President Joe Biden is expected to sign soon will boost investments in the U.S. Department of Energy by the most since its founding in 1977 and create about 1,000 jobs in the agency, officials said on Wednesday.

The bipartisan bill contains more than $62 billion in incentives for emerging and traditional technologies for the department.

Biden and his fellow Democrats in Congress are also seeking to pass a bigger reconciliation bill that has even more incentives for the energy transition, but which has been delayed by disagreements within the party.

“Over the coming days, weeks, months, we are going to have to step up,” Tarak Shah, the DOE chief of staff told reporters about the programs included in the bipartisan bill.

“We anticipate somewhere around 1,000 new folks coming on board to help us spend this money efficiently and effectively for the American people.” The DOE has about 13,000 federal employees and tens of thousands more at its 17 national labs.

For the development of new technologies, the bipartisan bill includes more than $7 billion in incentives for producing, sourcing, and recycling minerals and materials for batteries to store renewable power.

It also has $21.5 billion for clean energy demonstration plants for development of hydrogen gas, sucking carbon emissions out of the air and from industrial plants, and for advanced nuclear power plants.

Hydrogen can be used in fuel cell vehicles, mixed with natural gas, or in making synthetic fuels for ships, but costs about four times as much to generate from wind and solar power as from fossil fuels.

On helping the existing U.S. energy system function better, the bill also has $11 billion in grants for states, tribes and utilities to enhance the resilience of the electric grid from extreme weather and cyber attacks.

And it creates a $6 billion nuclear power credit program at the department to save existing reactors, some of which have been struggling to compete with plants that burn plentiful natural gas and with falling costs for renewable power.

The nuclear power credit program will be one of the fastest programs to develop, with a deadline of 180 days to start running. Reactor owners will have to submit applications showing that their plants are under economic duress before receiving any subsidies.

An official said nuclear power was essential for meeting Biden’s climate goals, including decarbonizing the electric grid by 2035.

By Timothy Gardner

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-energy-dept-to-hire-1000-workers-in-infrastructure-boost-officials-say_4097750.html?utm_medium=epochtimes&utm_source=telegram

A Swiss billionaire is bankrolling a leading dark money group lobbying for the Biden administration’s Build Back Better plan and green energy jobs initiatives, according to corporation and lobbying records reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon.

Climate Power, one of the main groups pushing for the White House’s climate agenda, has billed itself as a traditional advocacy organization, with an advisory board featuring John Podesta, Stacey Abrams, and former senator Harry Reid. But the group doesn’t actually exist independently—it is owned and operates as a front group under the Fund for a Better Future, a Democratic dark money organization that has received the majority of its funding from Swiss health care mogul Hansjorg Wyss’s foundation since 2016, according to corporation records.

Wyss has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the Fund for a Better Future and other progressive dark money groups and has been the subject of controversy since his opaque web of donations was detailed by the New York Times last spring. The connection between the Wyss-funded Fund for a Better Future and Climate Power has not been reported until now.

The link raises questions about foreign influence on the climate debate and the prominence of dark money groups in the Biden administration’s public advocacy campaign for the Build Back Better legislation. While foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to federal campaigns, lawmakers and watchdogs have raised concerns about foreign donations to nonprofit political advocacy organizations—so-called dark money groups—which could be used as a legal loophole to influence elections.

Americans for Public Trust, a conservative watchdog group, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission in May, calling for an investigation into whether some of Wyss’s donations amount to “campaign contributions from a foreign national, running afoul of federal law.”

The group told the Free Beacon that Wyss’s contributions to groups leading the climate legislation lobbying add to concerns about his political funding.

“Hansjörg Wyss has been indirectly funding American politics for years, so the news that his foreign money is tied up in this latest dark money campaign to pass President Biden’s legislative agenda comes as no surprise,” Americans for Public Trust executive director Caitlin Sutherland told the Free Beacon. “Americans for Public Trust has previously filed an FEC complaint against Mr. Wyss calling for an investigation into his political spending, and we look forward to the commission taking action.”

Wyss, a Swiss citizen born in Bern who has declined to clarify his citizenship status in the United States, has become one of the most prolific donors to progressive advocacy groups in recent years. His foundations, the Berger Action Fund and the Wyss Foundation, have poured over $200 million into organizations supporting Democratic policies since 2016, the New York Times reported in May.

Since last summer, Climate Power has emerged as one of the most active lobbying arms of the Democratic Party’s climate agenda. The group rolled out a $10 million ad blitz in June, aimed at pushing lawmakers to support the Biden administration’s American Jobs Plan and Build Back Better legislation.

Climate Power also hired a lobbying firm, Pioneer Public Affairs, last February to press lawmakers in the House and Senate on “climate provisions of the American Rescue Plan (H.R.1319) and the American Jobs Plan,” according to lobbying disclosure records.

Climate Power is not an independent entity, according to records reviewed by the Free Beacon. The group operates under the ownership of the Fund for a Better Future, according to business records filed in Sacramento, where the fund is based.

The Fund for a Better Future received $44,468,000 from Wyss’s foundations between 2017 and 2020, according to the latest available financial disclosure records. Wyss’s contributions to the Fund for a Better Future make up “the majority of its funding” during this time, the Times reported in May.

Between 2017 and 2018, Wyss’s financial support accounted for 80 percent of the Fund for a Better Future’s total receipts, according to financial disclosure records.

According to Climate Power’s website, the group was founded “by the Center for American Progress Action Fund, League of Conservation Voters, and Sierra Club” and “integrates hard-hitting research, polling, state and national earned media, digital and paid media to influence the national conversation, embolden leaders to take immediate, bold climate action, and expose climate deniers and their oil and gas lobby allies.”

Climate Power launched another front group in August called the “Great American Build” to promote the Biden administration’s Build Back Better agenda. The Great American Build’s website describes it as a “public awareness campaign launched by Climate Power, League of Conservation Voters and their allies to build the momentum necessary to create millions of good clean energy jobs and give our economy the boost it needs.”

Climate Power did not respond to a request for comment. The Wyss Foundation did not respond to a request for comment.

https://freebeacon.com/policy/swiss-billionaire-bankrolling-dark-money-group-pushing-for-biden-climate-initiative/

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.), a moderate who has broken with his party over a slew of issues, took to Twitter on Wednesday to warn that unprecedented inflation is not “transitory” as his party insists, but is only “getting worse.”

Currently, inflation of the U.S. dollar is at its highest level since 1990. According to the Labor Department’s Consumer Price Index (CPI), inflation jumped by 0.9 percent in October alone, more than doubling September’s 0.4 percent increase.

The energy sector has been hit the hardest by rising costs according to different Labor Department data.

The CPI showed a 30 percent increase in the price of energy in October. The price of gasoline itself increased by a staggering 49.6 percent in October.

These increased prices have been partly driven by an intentional effort by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to decrease their oil production. At the same time, the United States has cut its own oil production significantly since President Joe Biden, who promised to “transition away” from fossil fuels during the 2020 presidential campaign.

The cost of food also increased by 5.3 percent during the month of October, riding on the back of unprecedented supply chain issues.

Since Biden took office, many Democratic leaders, including Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and Democratic caucus chair and co-chairs Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), have insisted that this unprecedented inflation is the result of the nation’s efforts to bounce back from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The inflation, these leaders have insisted, is “transitory.” Sen. Joe Manchin, who has raised the alarm on inflation for months, does not agree with this assessment.

On Twitter, Manchin wrote: “By all accounts, the threat posed by record inflation to the American people is not ‘transitory’ and is instead getting worse. From the grocery store to the gas pump, Americans know the inflation tax is real and DC can no longer ignore the economic pain Americans feel every day.”

The “inflation tax,” long a talking point for conservative and libertarian elements of the Republican Party, has been embraced by Manchin, who has demanded that his party limit its spending in order to combat continued inflation of the money supply.

The United States has added trillions in new spending since the arrival of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus to its shores.

In March 2020, soon after the beginning of the global pandemic, Congress authorized $2.2 trillion in spending to respond to the virus, which included direct payments to qualifying American families. President Donald Trump signed that bill into law not long after.

Later the same year, after months of wrangling, Congress passed an additional $900 billion in spending to modify and extend the earlier legislation, which Trump also signed into law.

Around a year after its original CCP virus relief package Congress, now controlled by Democrats, used the reconciliation process to pass a further $1.9 trillion bill called the American Rescue Plan on a party-line vote. The bill was quickly signed into law by Biden.

Recently, Democrats also passed a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill with some Republican support, though many in the GOP opposed the bill.

At the same time, Democrats tried to push through a $1.75 trillion budget bill even though the legislation had not been scored by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO); They failed in this effort after moderates demanded a CBO score as a precondition to vote for the bill, but Democrats still hope to pass the legislation in the near future.

The U.S. government has already added $6.2 trillion in new obligations with these bills, which will shoot to $7.95 trillion if the Democrats’ budget reconciliation bill is passed.

Manchin Has Tied Effects of Inflation to His Support of Budget Bill

In the wake of this unprecedented spending, Manchin has staked out a position against much of his party, emphasizing fiscal responsibility and warning of the effects that Democrats’ unprecedented spending will have on inflation.

“I will not support a bill that is this consequential without thoroughly understanding the impact it will have on our national debt, our economy, and most importantly all of our American people,” said Manchin at a Nov. 1 press conference. “We must allow time for complete transparency and analysis on the impact of changes to our tax code, energy, and climate policies to ensure that our country is well-positioned to remain the superpower of the world.”

At the same conference, Manchin accused his party of hiding the price of the bill.

The “so-called $1.75 trillion” reconciliation bill, said Manchin, is full of “shell games” and “budget gimmicks that make the real cost of the [bill] estimated to be nearly twice that amount.” He continued, “This is a recipe for economic crisis. None of us should ever misrepresent to the American people what the real cost of legislation is.”

“To be clear, I will not support the reconciliation bill without knowing how the bill will impact our debt and our economy and our country,” the West Virginia Democrat vowed.

Manchin also repeated a demand first put forward in a Sept. 2 op-ed for the Wall Street Journal. To win his vote, he said on both occasions, his party must give him “greater clarity about why Congress chooses to ignore the serious effects inflation and debt have on existing government programs.”

While Manchin staking out a position against his party is nothing new, he is now one of the only Democrats who have broken from the party line over inflation.

Manchin has tied his support for the Democrats’ budget bill, in part, to the effects of inflation. His latest split with the party over inflation could bode poorly for Democrats as they attempt to win Manchin’s vote for the budget bill after months of delays.

After the Labor Department report came out, Biden said that fighting inflation would now be a “top priority” for the administration, but getting inflation under control is sure to take some time—time that will be in short supply for congressional Democrats as they frantically try to pass their budget before the 2022 midterm election season.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/inflation-not-transitory-and-getting-worse-sen-manchin_4097221.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-11-10-2&mktids=31d83813b1a8591921854f8b4b82edf3&est=lEs3lSn4k3CVvk0FAFJXZFnzRJLrWMa%2BFwJJVEzOYRmQqSk%2BG5R5Pavy%2FWbjKEm4NA%3D%3D

Import ban could agitate Beijing as U.S. pushes for climate deal

Climate czar John Kerry is lobbying House lawmakers to oppose legislation that would ban the import of all Chinese-made goods that are produced using Uyghur slave labor, a move aimed at buying goodwill with Beijing as the United States seeks a new climate deal, according to congressional sources and foreign policy insiders familiar with the matter.

Kerry and a faction of State Department officials oppose legislation meant to curtail Chinese imports made using slave labor, sources said, due to concerns that the restrictive measures will agitate Beijing. The legislation, known as the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, in July passed the Senate by voice vote but is stalled in the House. It would target China’s construction of solar panels and other equipment the United States needs to migrate the country to green energy sources.

The Biden administration’s internal strife over China points to a tug-of-war between the White House, which supports this type of measure, and the State Department, which is pushing a softer China policy in the hopes of securing a climate deal with Beijing—an effort that Kerry is spearheading in his role as presidential envoy for climate change. Kerry has been under fire in recent weeks for owning stakes in an investment group that funds companies that are linked to forced labor and have been blacklisted for human rights abuses, as the Washington Free Beacon reported.

Reports issued during the past several weeks indicate that Kerry, who operates out of the State Department, is the principal opponent of increased sanctions on China and its use of Uyghur slave labor. During remarks Wednesday at the United Nations climate change conference in Glasgow, Kerry told reporters that the United States and China have made progress on reducing carbon emissions, which is fueling speculation that any action on Uyghur slave labor will take a backseat to these ongoing negotiations.

Kerry was reported to have engaged in a “forceful debate with other administration officials on the matter before his most recent China trip,” according to the Associated Press, a claim that jibes with information provided by congressional and foreign policy community sources to the Free Beacon. One veteran foreign policy hand told the Free Beacon that there “is a lot of chatter about” Kerry’s opposition to the legislation swirling “in the China policy circle.”

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

Michael Sobolik, a fellow in Indo-Pacific studies at the American Foreign Policy Council, told the Free Beacon he sees evidence of an “ongoing turf war within the Biden administration over China policy—specifically, how will the president square his climate goals with his insistence that human rights is at the center of his foreign policy?”

China is forcing the Biden administration “to choose between those priorities,” Sobolik said. “If the bill remains stuck, it’s a safe bet that Biden’s rhetoric about human rights in China is just that—rhetoric.”

Renewed attention has been cast on the issue in the days since Democrats stripped language from the hotly contested House budget reconciliation bill that would have leveled restrictions on China’s surveillance and internment of Uyghurs, a move that generated outrage in the human rights community.

One senior GOP congressional aide tracking the matter said it is becoming clear that Kerry’s push for a climate deal is eclipsing the Biden administration’s human rights agenda, which has expressly included Uyghur rights issues.

“It’s not surprising that the Biden administration, especially Secretary Kerry, is actively pushing back against any efforts in Congress to stop Uyghur Muslim slave labor in China. Kerry will do whatever he can to get a climate deal with China, even allowing federal science funding for Uyghur Muslim slave labor and those involved in constructing the Uyghur forced labor camps,” said the source, who was not authorized to speak on record. “The Democrats should never again mention the word human rights.”

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan was also reported to be siding with Kerry on the issue, but the White House National Security Council rejected this claim when contacted by the Free Beacon.

“This is false,” an NSC spokesman told the Free Beacon when asked if Sullivan was part of the faction opposing the slave labor legislation. “We share Congress’s concern about forced Labor in Xinjiang and in fact the Biden administration has taken concrete measures on our own, including but not limited to visa restrictions, financial sanctions, export controls, import restrictions, the release of a business advisory, and rallying the G7 to commit to take action to ensure all global supply chains are free from the use of forced labor, including from Xinjiang.”

Republican lawmakers say that Kerry’s lobbying on the issue is wholly inappropriate given Kerry’s holdings in an investment group that funds companies linked to Uyghur slave labor. Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) and Rep. Chris Smith (R., N.J.) wrote to President Joe Biden earlier this week to express their concerns about the matter.

“There isn’t a good explanation for why President Biden has not fired John Kerry, who appears to be profiting from slave labor,” Rubio told the Free Beacon. “But it does help explain why Kerry and others in the Biden administration continue to undermine my commonsense, bipartisan, and bicameral Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.”

Sen. Ben Sasse (R., Neb.), another chief backer of efforts to penalize China, told the Free Beacon, “John Kerry wants all of us to have a moral backbone as weak as a soufflé. Let’s be clear what he’s asking for: He’s so desperate for a paper-thin Chi-Comm climate pledge he can parade around Paris that he wants us to deny a genocide. It’s pathetic.”

Congressional Democrats are also divided on efforts to penalize the CCP’s use of Uyghur slave labor. Republican foreign policy leaders in the House told the Free Beacon that Democratic leaders refuse to explain why they stripped language from the budget reconciliation bill that would have penalized Beijing’s use of slave labor.

“Democrats still haven’t explained why they’re taking steps to enable and protect the Chinese Communist Party’s use of Uighur slave labor in the reconciliation bill,” Rep. Jim Banks (R., Ind.), a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told the Free Beacon. “I sure hope it doesn’t have anything to do with John Kerry’s desperate attempts to reach a climate deal with China. Anyone who says they care about the worst human rights violation of our lifetime but supports this bill is a hypocrite.”

Rep. Greg Steube (R., Fla.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said Democrats “cruelly decided to remove” measures aimed at ensuring U.S. taxpayer dollars do not fund entities engaged in using Uyghur slave labor. “Democrats decry racial injustice in America but actively support slavery in China,” Steube said.

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/kerry-lobbying-against-legislation-to-ban-import-of-chinese-goods-produced-by-slave-labor/

If you have any doubt that the radical left is alive and well in the Biden administration, this should wipe it out once and for all.

Saule Omarova, the administration’s dubious pick for comptroller of the currency, is a radical by pretty much anyone’s definition. Up for a job that would put her in charge of regulating the country’s largest banks, she published a paper earlier this year with a proposal to “end banking as we know it,” as the New York Post reported.

And, as a video now circulating online shows, she’s on record desiring the destruction of the nation’s fossil fuel industries.

Scared yet?

Documents show Saule Omarova was a committed communist & planned a career as a Prof. of Scientific Communism. She hid her Karl Marx thesis and conveniently omits that she was planning to be a Professor of Marxism.

What else is her CV omitting? https://t.co/0h3Dra1UvP pic.twitter.com/PeW7pMBkSf

— BidenNoms, A Project of AAF (@bidennoms) November 8, 2021

Biden Responds to Skyrocketing Gas Prices by Thinking About Shutting Down Another American Pipeline

Whatever you think about climate change, it’s clear that political forces on the left are leveraging the idea in their bid for globalization. The COVID-19 pandemic is real, and the left politicized it in a sweeping power grab. They have no shame.

Speaking in March at a “Social Wealth Seminar” sponsored by the Jain Family Institute, according to The Daily Wire, Omarova made her feelings about the fossil fuel industries clear.

“We want them to go bankrupt if we want to tackle climate change,” Omarova said.

Biden nominee Saule Omarova saying the quiet part out loud. On the oil, coal and gas industries:

“We want them to go bankrupt if we want to tackle climate change.” pic.twitter.com/luMR2HEMK9

— BidenNoms, A Project of AAF (@bidennoms) November 9, 2021

Born and raised in the former Soviet Union, Omarova graduated from Moscow State University in 1989, as noted in an October column by Forbes magazine editor in chief Steve Forbes.

“Amazingly, she still has nice things to say about the defunct U.S.S.R., where Western-style liberties were non-existent and countless millions died from man-made famines, arbitrary executions and, of course, in the notorious Gulag Archipelago,” Forbes wrote

Forbes also noted that Omarova,  “advocates that consumer banking be taken over by the Federal Reserve and wants the government to direct where loans are made.”

Is Biden trying to ruin America?

In fact, her appearance at the Jain Family Institute seminar was to advocate the idea of a “National Investment Authority” — a top-down control of the economy that would basically implement the communist ideal of the state having the ultimate power over what, in a capitalist system, are free-market decisions.

For the record, as the Washington Examiner noted, Omarova denies having communist or Marxist sympathies (she told the Financial Times she’s an easy target for critics because she’s “an immigrant, a woman, minority”). But the names that are used aren’t nearly as important as the ideas.

And when it comes to the kind of government Omarova’s ideas conjure up, you get the picture: It’s leftist. It’s radical. And it’s a horror show.

If you have any doubt Biden is on board with Omarova’s thinking about fossil fuels,  the White House has confirmed the administration is now studying the impact of shutting down the Embridge Line 5 pipeline. The pipeline brings 540,000 barrels of oil a day — about 23 million gallons — into the United States through Michigan’s Straits of Mackinac, according to Breitbart.

If you haven’t noticed, gas prices are already sky-high. After his opening-day decision to shut down the Keystone XL pipeline, why on earth would Biden consider shutting down another pipeline under the current conditions? To make fuel prices go even higher?

Is he trying to destroy what the radical left sees as deplorable middle America?

Put the coal, gas, and oil, industries out of business, nationalize the banks, and what comes next? Hand over the rest of our hard-won American freedoms to would-be globalist overlords?

Nancy Pelosi Exposes Her Political Elitism: Officiates at Billionaire Oil Heiresses’ Wedding

I don’t think so.

Omarova’s nomination is a brazen show of the radical left’s plans for America. Biden is with them.

They must be stopped.

Jack Gist

Jack Gist is an award-winning writer who has published essays, poetry and fiction in Catholic World Report, First Things, The Imaginative Conservative, New Oxford Review and others.

Conversation

Notice: Due to threatened de-monetization, we have temporarily removed commenting while we build a long-term commenting solution that allows you to voice your opinion freely and allows us to continue to publish the news fearlessly and cover topics that you care about. If you would like to personally partner with The Western Journal to help us continue publishing while under relentless assault by Big Tech, please visit our subscription page here. We encourage you to share this article and discuss with your friends.

Sometimes you have to wonder whose team President Joe Biden is playing on.

Nearly every decision he has made since taking office in January has been to weaken the United States.

What’s shaping up to be the latest example is the Biden administration considering shutting down a vital pipeline that transports 540,000 barrels of oil per day into the U.S. from western Canada.

White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed the reports are true, saying the Army Corps of Engineers is doing an environmental impact study on the Line 5 pipeline that runs through Michigan.

Biden spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre acknowledges the Biden administration is “studying” shutting down the Line 5 Pipeline.

If Biden shuts down Line 5, Millions of Americans could face higher energy bills this winter. pic.twitter.com/7ZJoDIBd0S

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) November 8, 2021

Woman Nearly Dies, Then Has Both Legs Amputated After Mistaking Mysterious Infection for COVID-19

Of course, this brilliant move comes after Biden canceled the Keystone XL pipeline on his first day in office, which was slated to transport over 800,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to refineries in Texas.

Oh, and he halted oil exploration on federal lands just as the U.S. had reached energy independence during the Trump years, and he closed down drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska too.

The United States is producing nearly 2 million barrels of oil a day less under Biden than it was at its peak under former President Donald Trump, during whose administration the nation became a net energy exporter for the first time in nearly 70 years.

One barrel of oil refines to about 20 gallons of gasoline, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Predictably, with less supply and rising demand, gas prices have risen by an average of over $1.30 per gallon nationwide.

A year ago we were energy independent, a net exporter, and a gallon of gas was 2 bucks and change. After less than a year of a war on fuel producers here and giveaways to Russia, all those gains are reversed. The surprise is how quickly everything changed. https://t.co/JD3dF4mBjg

— David Asman (@DavidAsmanfox) October 12, 2021

Perhaps, one could argue that Biden and his team have calculated if they make it painful enough at the pump, they will speed along the day when the U.S. transitions completely away from fossil fuels to wind and solar and, who knows, unicorn travel.

Obama Pulls a Biden: Thinks He’s in Ireland During Speech to Climate Change Conference in Scotland

Well, that sounds nice, but it’s contradicted by the fact that imports of Russian and Saudi Arabian oil are up. So we’re burning oil, just less of our own.

The EIA reported that the U.S. imported 24.6 million barrels in August from Russia on top of over 26 million in May. That’s nearly 5 million more barrels per month than the highest number ever recorded under Trump.

During the previous administration, the amount imported consistently ranged between 11 million and 16 million barrels per month.

Under Biden, the total has been over 20 million barrels every month, with the exception of February.

In August, Bloomberg reported that Russia had become America’s No. 2 foreign oil supplier, edging out Mexico.

Because the Biden admin would rather import more Russian and Saudi oil than Canadian…brilliant. https://t.co/Rzbfr9cR6A

— Randy DeSoto (@RandyDeSoto) November 8, 2021

Meanwhile, oil imports from Canada have stayed roughly the same between Biden’s and Trump’s presidencies.

So why are we favoring Russia over Canada?

That wasn’t the only pro-Russia move Biden has made.

In May, the president announced no sanctions would be imposed to block the completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, as Trump had threatened to do. The pipeline will transport natural gas from Russia into Western Europe.

To summarize, Biden — citing climate change concerns — shut down the Keystone XL pipeline, killing American jobs, and greenlit Nord Stream 2, which benefits Russia economically and gives Russian President Vladimir Putin a leverage point over NATO allies like Germany.

And now the administration is considering shutting down another U.S.-Canada pipeline, which is almost certain to drive up prices even more.

Again, whose team is Biden on?

For all the hooting and hollering by the Democrats about Trump and “Russia, Russia, Russia,” it sure feels like Biden’s the one Putin has in his back pocket.

It’s the laugh heard ’round America — and the world.

Last week, Jennifer Granholm, President Joe Biden’s energy secretary, was appearing on Bloomberg TV when she was asked this question: “What is the Granholm plan to increase oil production in America?”

Granholm immediately began laughing.  “That is hilarious,” she responded. “Would that I had the magic wand on this.”

“As you know, of course, oil is a global market. It is controlled by a cartel. That cartel is called OPEC, and they made a decision yesterday that they were not going to increase beyond what they were already planning.”

Laughing at Americans paying more for gas?

Biden and the Democrats are out-of-touch with how their failed policies hurt working families.pic.twitter.com/9lbi2Nzx5I

— GOP (@GOP) November 5, 2021

Recount Possible in New Jersey as Former Governor Speaks Out, Candidate Says Best Legal Experts Stand Ready

There are several problems to this answer, but the biggest one is the prelude to it: the laugh.

For Granholm, what she was dismissing is Americans who are paying a lot more at the pump — and stand to see further price increases. According to CNN, Bank of America projected last week that by June 2022, the price of crude oil would rise by 45 percent.

Do you think there will be a food shortage?

It’s not just the pump or the prices on store shelves, however. Lest we forget, carbon energy affects a number of other areas, too — including agriculture, where experts are predicting an energy shortfall will mean a deadly food shortage in the near future.

“I want to say this loud and clear right now, that we risk a very low crop in the next harvest,” said Svein Tore Holsether, the CEO and president of Norwegian-based fertilizer giant Yara International, according to a Fortune article published Thursday.

“I’m afraid we’re going to have a food crisis.”

Fertilizer prices, he said, had roughly tripled during the summer and fall, in part due to natural gas prices in Europe increasing at about the same rate.

Yara produces ammonia, which is one of the ingredients of artificial fertilizer. To this, they either utilize hydropower or natural gas.

“To produce a ton of ammonia last summer was $110,” Holsether said. “And now it’s $1,000. So it’s just incredible.”

Biden Responds to Skyrocketing Gas Prices by Thinking About Shutting Down Another American Pipeline

While Yara has donated $25 million of fertilizer to vulnerable farmers, he said, they can’t just give the product away — and since September, it’s been reducing its production of ammonia by 40 percent.

While food prices have also gone up, meaning some farmers can afford to pay for more expensive fertilizer, smaller farmers could end up taking a hit. What’s more, Holsether predicted a food crisis could unfold similar to the computer chip crisis we’re currently experiencing — a delayed reaction to the effects of the COVID-19 shutdowns.

“That’s all linked to factories being shut down in March, April and May of last year, and we’re reaping the consequences of that now,” he said.

“But if we get the equivalent to the food system … not having food is not annoying, that’s a matter of life or death.”

Beyond food shortages is food families can no longer afford. That’s what made Granholm’s answer so infuriating; the administration she works for views carbon energy production and security as a minimal priority. (See how they canceled the permits on the Keystone XL pipeline and paused federal oil leases, for instance.)

This isn’t just about the price at the pump — and it doesn’t just affect Americans, particularly given agricultural exports.

Laugh now, Secretary Granholm. When families in America and abroad are starving or can’t afford basic foodstuffs, thanks in part to your administration’s reliance on OPEC for carbon-based energy, you can imagine how that cackle will look in 2022 political advertisements.

Although six House Democrats from the progressive wing of the party voted against passage of the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi passed the bill late Friday night with the help of 13 Republicans. Hidden inside the 2,300 pages of this complete boondoggle of a bill are numerous dangerous provisions that would have our founders rolling in their graves.

Shortly before the vote, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana warned colleagues about several of the most egregious initiatives contained in this legislation.

Scalise, holding up a copy of the unwieldy bill that lawmakers had only received the night before, reminded his colleagues of Biden’s promise that passage of his agenda would not cost Americans earning under $400,000 one dime.

“He breaks the promise right here,” Scalise said. “In the bill, a tax, according to the American Gas Association, will increase household electricity rates by 30 percent. And by the way, that’s low-income families that pay that tax the hardest.”

Democrats had originally put amnesty for illegal immigrants into their larger Build Back Better bill. Because there is no Republican support in the Senate for this legislation, they hoped to pass it through the process of reconciliation.

Seconds After Being Shot by Alec Baldwin, Here’s What Halyna Hutchins Told Someone Nearby

However, in September, Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth McDonough ruled that amnesty could not be included in a reconciliation bill because it has nothing to do with either spending or revenue. So they added it to the infrastructure bill instead.

Scalise told colleagues: “Millions of additional people will get amnesty in this bill. And it comes at a time where President Biden is negotiating — initially he said he wasn’t — and then the White House had to go back up and say the Justice Department is negotiating half a million dollar checks to people who came across our border illegally and then they’re going to give amnesty to millions more people. Estimates are seven million more people.”

“Can you imagine the flood that will come over when they hear that you can get a half a million dollars a person if President Biden gets his way?” he adds.

Scalise was referring to reports that the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services are in talks to give $450,000 per person to immigrants who were separated from family members at the border during the Trump Administration. Questioned about these payments by Fox News’ Peter Doocy last week, Biden said the story wasn’t true. He was later “corrected” by White House officials who confirmed that negotiations are ongoing.

Do you believe inflation will rise next year from current levels?

Next, he addressed the addition of 87,000 IRS agents. “They call this infrastructure. They call this equity. Whatever they want to call it, it’s an army of IRS agents that are going to comb through your bank account. … Why? Because they’ve got to generate hundreds of billions of dollars to spend on more inflation-inducing spending. …”

“According to this Penn-Wharton account [a budget model], you’re going to have over $4 trillion of spending with $1.5 trillion of new taxes. By the way, that’s $2.5 trillion of additional debt. The President says there’s no cost – no cost, just … $2.5 trillion of debt.”

“These IRS agents are going to have to account for over $200 billion to find money from your checking accounts,” he said. “That’s what they’re trying to do at dark of night.”

“No wonder they don’t want a CBO score [on this bill], no wonder they want to do this by dark of night. This is going to induce more inflation that’s hurting families all across America,” Scalise said.

In this bill Dems are trying to ram through:
– Mass amnesty
– 87,000 new IRS agents
– Insane leftist mandates
– Giveaways to union bosses
– Natural gas tax that’ll raise energy costs

It’s a socialist takeover of America.

No wonder they’re doing it in the dark of night. pic.twitter.com/bvZ4v4BJ23

— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) November 6, 2021

13 Republicans Who Voted for Biden’s Infrastructure Bill Scramble to Explain Themselves to Voters

Scalise listed two additional items in his Twitter post that time would not allow him to cover in his floor speech. The first was giveaways to union bosses.

According to the Labor Department, “Davis-Bacon Act and Related Act contractors and subcontractors must pay their laborers and mechanics employed under the contract no less than the locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits for corresponding work on similar projects in the area.” Locally prevailing wages are set by the Labor Department.

A White House fact sheet states that “the overwhelming majority of the funds in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will be subject to Davis-Bacon requirements. … These requirements will protect wages for millions of workers, grow the economy, and support good-paying, union jobs.” (Emphasis mine.)

Stand for America has warned that tying federally funded infrastructure projects to the Davis-Bacon Act will make these projects substantially more expensive and will put unions at a distinct advantage to win these coveted government construction projects. They explain that “it’s mainly unionized companies that pay prevailing wage salaries, so they’re more likely to be chosen for federally-funded construction projects.”

According to their report, “Under Davis-Bacon, the government jacks up required wages. Studies show that prevailing wages can drive the costs of projects 20% higher than market cost. As of just a few years ago, carpenters’ prevailing wages in Nassau-Suffolk, New York, were 30% above market. Electricians and plumbers’ prevailing wages were 45.5% and 58.7% above market, respectively.”

The organization also discusses the union giveaways included in the Build Back Better bill, which they said are even worse.

The final grievance on Scalise’s list was “insane left mandates.” The bill contains an abundance of insane left mandates, so I’m not exactly sure which ones he had in mind.

I imagine he was referring to the legislation’s aggressive climate-change measures. Yahoo’s senior climate editor — yes, they have a climate editor — calls the spending in this bill alone “the largest climate change investment in U.S. history.”

For example, it includes $150 billion for clean energy advancement. This is a mere drop in the bucket when one considers Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen’s mind-boggling estimate of $100 to $150 trillion over the next 30 years to reach “net-zero” emissions. She delivered this stunning figure in her remarks to COP26 attendees last week. ZeroHedge had the story.

No need to worry, though. Yellen has assured us that this represents the “greatest economic opportunity” of our lives.

Scalise is right. None of these items are good for America. All are intended to move the country closer to becoming a socialist state.

The passage of the reconciliation bill would bring us to the brink. Let’s hope Sen. Joe Manchin, a moderate Democrat from West Virginia who has thus far withheld his tie-breaking support, either blocks it, which may be too much to hope for, or at least takes the most dangerous provisions out of the final bill.

This administration represents the greatest national security threat America faces today.

A Chinese state-run oil and gas company linked to the son of the President of the United States, Hunter Biden, hit record levels of natural gas production amidst the Biden White House’s assault on American energy independence.

Sinopec, also known as China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation, is a Chinese Communist regime-controlled oil and gas enterprise. Its “fully-owned subsidiary” Sinopec Marketing Company enjoyed nearly $1 billion in investment from Hunter Biden’s private equity firm BHR Partners.

Finalized in March 2015, the investments from the controversial investment fund led to BHR Partners amassing a nearly 30 percent stake in Sinopec.

Hunter reportedly still owns a 10 percent stake in BHR Partners, whose LinkedIn profile highlights its Sinopec investment, revealing it was involved “in the pilot state-owned enterprise reform deal involving the segregation and capitalization of Sinopec Group’s non-oil business into Sinopec Marketing Corporation.”

A press release from the energy company – “Sinopec Puts Largest Gas Storage Cluster in North China into Operation” – details its record-breaking, new natural gas storage facility. Its current storage size of 10.03 billion cubic meters is expected to increase by an additional 1.116 billion cubic meters following the completion of additional gas storage facilities.

“Sinopec continues to accelerate the construction of gas storage facilities and improve gas storage and peak shaving capabilities in China. The Company is stepping up to complete key projects including the Zhongyuan gas storage cluster and Huangchang gas storage facility in Hubei Province and more after completing the gas storage facilities including Yong 21 in Shandong Province, Wei 11 in Zhongyuan Oilfield region, Guxi in Jilin Province and Qingxi in Sichuan Province, steadily expanding the scale of natural gas storage and effectively improving the storage capacity and gas peak shaving capability to guarantee the supply of natural gas,” the company explains.

The Biden Effect: Attorney General Merrick Garland Tanks in Latest Approval Data.

The new project follows Sinopec’s Fuling Shale Gas Field hitting a country-wide record for production quantity amidst the Biden White House canceling the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

The day of reckoning over the Western world’s self-destructive indulgence of the excesses of the environmental movement must now be almost at hand.

An important part of the Bidenization of America has been the frivolous discarding of America’s status as an energy self-sufficient nation after 75 years of oil imports.

As if completely deaf to the many and urgent warnings of the cost of shutting down the XL pipeline from Canada and groveling to the environmental agitators by rolling back offshore exploration and fracking, President Joe Biden and other administration spokespeople have, apparently unselfconsciously, lowered themselves to beseeching the Russians and Iranians, countries with whom the United States notoriously possesses no reservoir of goodwill, to join with the rest of OPEC in increasing oil production.

This initiative is of a piece with Secretary of State Blinken’s scolding of the Taliban regime the White House and the Pentagon helped usher into office in Afghanistan, for insufficient “diversity” in the selection of the new regime’s cabinet ministers, with John Kerry’s degrading petition of China for greater respect for the conjured dangers of climate change, and with the chairman of the joint chiefs, General Millie, volunteering from the Ruritanian vastness of his hyper-beribbonned tunic that the recent testing of Chinese and Russian hypersonic nuclear-capable missiles was “a Sputnik moment.”

Where were Millie and his colleagues, prior to their masterly performance in Afghanistan, and former Defense Secretary Mattis, when President Trump provided the Defense Department the funds to do everything it needed to assure American military superiority?

All of these reflections indicate the other-worldly preoccupations of this administration. This is the mentality that admits thousands of likely COVID carriers illegally across the southern border into the United States every day while failing to discourage Democratic civic administrations in New York and elsewhere from laying off policemen and firefighters, most of whom have a COVID immunity from having previously contracted that illness and recovered from it, for declining to be double vaccinated.

Apart from being unjust and probably illegal and absurdly inconsistent, this is a policy that inevitably accelerates the skyrocketing rates of urban violent crime in most American cities.

Self-Inflicted Wounds

But it is the saga of self-inflicted economic wounds in appeasement of climate change hysteria that most vividly illustrates the lethal toxicity of Bidenization. The spectacle of the president of the United States going cap-in-hand to the Kremlin and the ayatollahs is more demeaning than the indignities of the helicopters leaving the embassy compound in Saigon in 1975 and the seizure of the embassy hostages in Tehran in 1979.

And as the rites and antics of Bidenism accumulate, the major oil companies of the world have effectively ceased exploration, graciously introducing the eco-fairyland in Washington to the implications of supply and demand. That is, the supply of oil will decline as the demand increases and the price to ungrateful Americans increases.

If Biden imagines that the Kremlin and the ayatollahs or even our esteemed allies in Saudi Arabia (who cut the price of oil in the late Obama years in order to put a rod on the backs of the ayatollahs and in doing so saved Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia from Putin’s efforts to revive the Soviet Union), are going to palliate the violence eco-Bidenism has done to scores of millions of American households by raising gasoline and home fuel prices for the American public, he is more cognitively beset than is generally reckoned. (Ironically, the United States in the last twenty years, including the Trump term, had a brilliant record in reducing carbon emissions.)

Writing on Nov. 1, I expect the elections in Virginia on Nov. 2 will provide a sobering lesson in electoral arithmetic. This will be followed by the draconian comeuppance that the whole country is reserving for the Bidenists next year and especially in 2024. But we will have to endure these upcoming years with Job-like patience as the executive branch leads America into ever greater unnecessary energy expenses and evermore absurd “sustainable” energy boondoggles.

Referendum?

But there is a ray of hope that arises in mother England and in the contemporary plebiscitary spirit. It is not widely realized what an important geopolitical development Britain’s vote to depart the European Union five years ago was. And it is possible that a sequel is in the making.

The European Union was the successor to Cold War associations of European states that essentially strengthened the West in the Cold War by deepening the bonds that held Western Europe together and enabled it to resist the threats and blandishments of the Soviet bloc.

But after the Cold War ended satisfactorily, it became the pursuit of “an ever closer Europe” that would steadily aggregate into one confederal superstate that would enable Europe to reenter the world as a great power and, accordingly, a rival to the United States, rather than the meeting place of America’s principal allies.

For Great Britain, one of the worlds five or six most important countries and one of its very most distinguished nationalities, to secede from such a combination of states and resume the status that enabled it to be the principal ally of the United States in both world wars and in the Cold War, though it was not presented in this way to the British voters, was an act that reinforced America’s geopolitical position.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who led the campaign to depart Europe while maintaining cordial trade and political relations with it, all in the framework of the Western Alliance, is, inexplicably, a climate change enthusiast who in his more animated moments stops only slightly short of Biden’s parroted bunk about the “existential threat” of climate change.

But the British public, like the French “yellow jackets” who rioted and demonstrated for an entire angry year about gasoline and home heating fuel price increases due to additional taxation to combat climate change, have real reservations about Boris’s current hobby-horse.

As this is an issue on which it will be difficult to impose party discipline, as public resentment over the cost of reducing carbon emissions with higher taxes and prices becomes clearer, some are already foreseeing a British referendum on this issue, a “Climate Chexit.”

Historically, Britain is rivaled only by the United States and France as the most politically influential and widely emulated country in the world, and a British referendum on the cost of combating climate change, whatever its result, would generate substantial pressure for a similar consultation of public opinion in the United States.

Congressional and parliamentary democracies tend not to like referendums. The history of both systems favors the election of legislators to work out the precise wording of legislation and even in France the history of referendums prior to the current Fifth Republic was of rubber-stamps of questionable accuracy of the most self-serving initiatives of the emperors Napoleon I and Napoleon III.

The United States has no history of such nation-wide plebiscites but any reasonably worded question about the desirability of proceeding with the Biden administration’s $550 billion carbon suppression program triumphantly unveiled in Glasgow this week will almost certainly produce an unambiguous vote for rejection.

Since the faddists dominate the political class and the national political media, it would be a magnificent act of self-liberation for the United States to consult itself, and puncture the giant hot-air balloon of faddish and generally mindless environmentalism.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/will-appeasement-of-climate-change-hysteria-invite-a-popular-rejection_4081138.html

President Joe Biden and his administration have attacked American energy independence since he took office in January, and one former Keystone XL Pipeline contractor had a few choice words for the president about the consequences.

In an interview on “Fox & Friends First” Tuesday, laid-off pipeline worker Lynn Allen explained his thoughts on the nation’s gas prices, which are the highest on average since 2014 at $3.38 per gallon as of Monday, according to the American Automobile Association.

“I’m not surprised at all,” Allen said, “because everything that Biden’s touched or done — it’s a failure.”

“It ain’t nothing but a total failure. We went from America first to America last.”

He then praised former President Donald Trump for his approach to the energy sector.

‘Identifiable Harm’: Biden Kills JFK File Release, Issues Baffling Statement

“Trump had it going on,” he said. “The thing about it is that we’ve got all these high prices of oil and gas, we’ve got drilling rigs stacked, we’ve got roustabout crews ready to go, we’ve got pipeline contractors with all of their equipment is stacked in the yards. And I can tell you right now, we can put America to work next week if we needed to.”

While Biden is not solely responsible for the current gas prices, his energy policies have not helped mitigate the situation.

His team has done little more than pressure the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries to ramp up oil production — which has the majority of its oil reserves in the Middle East — and has been largely unsuccessful.

Should the Keystone pipeline project resume?

During a CNN town hall on Thursday, Biden came across as defeated on the issue of gas prices, and said there is not much action he can take to see prices fall before 2022.

“I don’t see anything that’s going to happen in the meantime that’s going to significantly reduce gas prices,” Biden said.

“A lot of Middle Eastern folks want to talk to me.”

“I’m not sure I’m going to talk to them,” he continued, “but the point is, it’s about gas production.”

President Biden says he expects gas prices will stay high until 2022.

“I don’t see anything that’s going to happen in the meantime that’s going to significantly reduce gas prices” #BidenTownHall https://t.co/2a7F6JKm0H pic.twitter.com/EOxLdHIgYa

— CNN (@CNN) October 22, 2021

Biden Wants to Waive Sanctions on Syrian Pipeline, Give Bloody Dictator a Chance He Refuses to Extend to the American Worker: Report

If Biden wanted to be proactive about the issue — which is hurting the average American’s wallet severely — he would admit he made a mistake by halting federal oil and gas leases and canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Of course, he won’t admit he was wrong. Far-left environmentalists take priority over middle and lower class Americans, even though everyone would benefit from American-produced oil and gas.

The Lynn Allens of the United States need to keep speaking up against the injustice happening in the energy industry and throughout the country at large, as Americans cannot afford to carry this financial burden any longer.

When questioned about the spike in gasoline prices at the CNN town hall on Thursday night, President Joe Biden stumbled and bumbled through his non-answer and ultimately said it depends on Saudi Arabia and a few other things “in the offing.”

Biden told CNN’s Anderson Cooper, “I don’t see anything that’s going to significantly reduce gas prices right now. My guess is you’ll start to see gas prices come down as we get by going into the winter, I mean excuse me, into next year in 2022.”

Biden on high gas prices:

“I don’t have a near term answer…It’s going to be hard.”

pic.twitter.com/z7LnNGoDsA

— Election Wizard (@ElectionWiz) October 22, 2021

The lofty prices Americans are paying at the pump didn’t happen by accident; this has been part of the progressive plan for years. Simply put, Democrats are convinced that if they can drive up the prices of fossil fuels to prohibitive levels, consumers will seek alternatives like electric cars.

Nine months ago, Biden was handed a country that was no longer dependent upon middle eastern tyrants for oil, the lifeblood of the U.S. economy. On day one, this administration set out to reverse that.

Forbes’ energy analyst David Blackmon wrote in March that the prices of fossil fuels began rising as soon as Biden won the election. Well aware of his administration’s planned policies, traders began driving up prices.

According to Blackmon, “The markets clearly see the Biden/Harris Administration as one that will work to inhibit U.S. oil production, which will also have the effect of tightening the global market, and traders have responded by driving up the price of crude oil.”

Traders were right. Hours after receiving the greatest honor of his life, Biden scribbled his name on an executive order revoking the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. 

Do you think the Biden presidency has diminished America?

Another executive order placed a 60-day moratorium on new oil and natural gas leases and drilling permits on federal lands and waters.

In May, Axios reported that the Biden Administration had agreed to waive sanctions on the company building the Nord Stream 2 pipeline into Germany.

Two months later, despite his “opposition” to the controversial project, Biden struck a deal with German Chancellor Angela Merkel to allow its completion.

The Biden administration’s deliberate efforts have worked all too well — perhaps even a bit faster than they had anticipated.

#California average #gasprices now just 15 cents away from reaching their all-time high of $4.67/gal set in 2012 (when Chevron’s Richmond refinery caught fire). It could happen by the holidays.

— Patrick De Haan ⛽️📊 (@GasBuddyGuy) October 21, 2021

Despite Multiple Vacations and Weekend Getaways, Biden Says He Has No Time for 4-Hour Flight to See Border Crisis Firsthand

Although today’s higher gas prices are the direct result of the Democrats’ carefully orchestrated plan, the administration has reason for concern. After all, higher prices at the pump have a much greater effect on lower- and middle-income earners. And we are headed into what’s expected to be a bruising midterm election season for their party.

Hence, the administration has made some feeble attempts to mitigate the problem — temporarily.

Over the summer, Biden urged members of OPEC to increase their output of oil. Consider the optics of a U.S. president having to beg Middle Eastern leaders to produce more oil just nine months after being handed an energy-independent country.

Late last month, Reuters reported that National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan traveled to Saudi Arabia to meet with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, ostensibly to discuss the war in Yemen. White House press secretary Jen Psaki “said oil was also ‘of concern’ and on the agenda.”

Of course it was. It was likely the sole reason for the trip.

A White House spokesperson told Reuters, “The national security adviser and his team reiterated the imperative of creating conditions to support global economic recovery in his meetings earlier this week.”

The article noted that the Biden administration had “previously said such conditions include having more oil on the market to stop rising energy prices and help the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.”

We should not be relying on Saudi Arabia for anything. This administration is projecting weakness on the world stage — again. It’s humiliating at best. At worst, it threatens our national security.

On October 13, the U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that Americans would be spending up to 54 percent more to heat their homes this winter.

That same day, Reuters reported that Biden had called on U.S. oil and gas producers to help relieve pressure on oil prices.

Fox News contributor Mark Thiessen appeared on the network’s program “The Faulkner Focus” to weigh in.

“Higher gas prices are a result of deliberate choices. The Biden Administration declared war on fossil fuels. They have made clear that they intend to put the fossil fuel industry out of business,” Thiessen said. “So we’ve got now only about 528 oil rigs pumping oil—which is half of what it was in 2019 under Trump. That is a result of—when you tell a business you’re going to put them out of business, they’re not gonna drill new wells, and Wall Street’s not gonna invest in the fossil fuels industry, so they’re exacerbating that.”

By every metric, the Biden administration has been an abject failure.

Nine months in, America is already much diminished. Most of us could have predicted the consequences of a Biden victory.

Our eyes turn to those who put petty grievances above what they knew was best for America. They voted for a man who was clearly slipping into dementia. They voted for a man who had struck a deal with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist, from whom the party had just commandeered the nomination. Biden agreed to advance his progressive agenda in return for his cooperation.

These voters are looking very foolish at the moment. Let’s hope they put a little more thought into their midterm voting decisions.

Democrats quietly filled their $3.5 trillion “infrastructure” bill with progressive priorities that will cripple average Americans.

In the latest discovery of a hidden agenda item, groups representing oil and gas companies said the bill would create $6 billion in new taxes on their industry.

Western Energy Alliance, the U.S. Oil and Gas Association, the International Association of Drilling Contractors and the Energy Workforce & Technology Council wrote a letter to the House Natural Resources Committee urging it to block the bill, Just the News reported.

The groups argued that the “ill-conceived and punitive fees, royalties, and penalties in an effort to raise just six billion dollars in revenue” would decrease the supply of over 6,000 everyday items. They said the new taxes would disproportionately affect poor, elderly and Native Americans.

Obviously, the taxes would further raise gas prices. According to Wednesday data from AAA, the average price of a gallon of gas in the U.S. has already risen a whopping $1.17 in just one year.

Kamala Harris, Stacey Abrams Threaten the Tax-Exempt Status of 300 Churches

In a 2014 CNN article, economist Stephen Stanley said that every penny of a decrease in the national gas price average equates to about a $1 billion “tax cut” for Americans.

At the time, CNN was attempting to praise the economy under then-President Barack Obama. However, the flip side of that coin means that every penny of an increase in the average gas price equals $1 billion taken out of Americans’ pockets.

By that logic, Americans have lost $117 billion since this time last year — and prices are only going up.

The groups representing the oil and gas industry said crude oil is already averaging $80 a barrel, but the price is expected to rise to at least $100. That will translate to even higher prices at the pump.

If that wasn’t bad enough, tax increases on oil and gas would affect thousands of other products.

“In 2020, of the approximately 6.6 billion barrels of total U.S. petroleum consumption, 44% was finished motor gasoline (including fuel ethanol), 21% was distillate fuel (heating oil and diesel fuel made from crude oil and biomass-based diesel fuel), and 6% was jet fuel,” Just the News reported.

“The remaining 29% came from over 13 other types of petroleum. To put this in perspective, one 42 gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The remaining half of the barrel is used to make more than 6,000 products.”

Those products include plastic and synthetic materials used in countless items, including paint, cleaning supplies, medicine, clothes, soap, toys and much more.

The groups said small business owners, who are already struggling from the coronavirus pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, will feel the effects of price increases. They predicted that “rural communities will be decimated,” as will minorities, who will lose “tens of thousands” of jobs.

150 San Fran Families Hire Private Security as Crime Tsunami Overwhelms Local Police

“Tribal budgets will be eviscerated and the Native American allottees who receive royalty payments will lose those payments each month, trapping them in poverty,” they continued.

Democrats know Americans would not support these tax increases, so they have hidden them in a massive spending plan under the guise of “infrastructure.” They did the same thing with measures like monitoring drivers and spying on Americans via the IRS.

While President Joe Biden claims to care about the middle and lower classes, he continually takes actions that will destroy them. What’s worse, though, is that he doesn’t even have the courage to admit it.