Bobby Jindal: How the ‘Radical Left’ Uses Energy Costs to Control Americans


Written by Kelsey Harkness

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal recently accused the Obama administration of making energy more expensive with the goal of making Americans more dependent on government.

“The Left, they like to tell us they are the ones [who] are following science and we’re the science deniers,” Jindal said to a small group of reporters after delivering a speech at The Heritage Foundation to debut his energy jobs plan. “But I think overall, their approach to energy is telling.”

The Republican governor said the “radical” Left wants energy to be scarce and expensive because it empowers the federal government to be more involved in Americans’ lives.

Doing so, the potential 2016 presidential candidate said, essentially allows the Obama administration to decide what kind of car you drive, what kind of home you live in, what kind of education your children receive, what kind of health care insurance is adequate for you, and what size soda you can drink.

Right now, Jindal said,  America “is on the road to failure.” He said:

It’s war on coal today; it’s going to be a war on natural gas tomorrow—it’s a war on any natural energy source. [The Left] wants it to be scarce; they want it to be expensive. You can see it in their actions, you can see it in their policies.

Jindal, elected governor of Lousiana in 2008 after two terms in Congress, has presided over a state hit by the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico while still recovering from Hurricane Katrina.

The Left wants energy to be scarce and expensive. You can see it in their actions, you can see it in their policies. -@BobbyJindal

He cited what he called the Left’s “startling” views on natural gas.

“When [natural gas] was 13 dollars, boy they loved it. As soon as it became affordable, all of the sudden they decided they didn’t like it so much,”  Jindal said.

Nicolas Loris, a Heritage economist who specializes in energy policy, agreed that some liberals initially supported natural gas “as a bridge fuel to take us to renewables.” But because the revolution in shale gas provided an abundance of cheap natural gas, he said, “that bridge became a lot longer than they anticipated.”

“While it may be bad news for other sources of energy,” Loris added, “the low-cost energy is great news for American families and businesses.”

Jindal also cited regulations on carbon dioxide as proof of an “ideologically extreme” agenda by President Obama and other liberals. He said:

“For much of the Left, the whole debate about [carbon dioxide]  is really a Trojan horse because these are folks that never did want a free market. This was a group that was always looking for an excuse to impose more government regulation, more government oversight. … This is just their latest vehicle to do it.”

Jindal’s energy plan, co-authored by Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas, is called “Organizing Around Abundance: Making America an Energy Superpower” and promises to usher in an “unprecedented” era of energy development and job growth.

Here are the main points:

1. Promote responsible development of domestic energy resources and construct infrastructure to transport it.

2. Encourage technological innovation of renewables and emerging energy without picking winners and losers. In other words:Stop giving taxpayer-funded handouts to politically preferred energy sources and technologies. Let the market work.

3. Unlock the economic potential of the manufacturing renaissance by putting America’s energy resources to work.

4. Eliminate burdensome regulations such as the Obama administration’s increased carbon dioxide restrictions on power plants.

5. Bolster national security by ending policies that ban the exporting of natural resources.

6. Pursue “no regrets” policies that reduce carbon dioxide emissions without punishing the U.S. economy by putting it at a disadvantage to those of other nations.

Loris gave points to the Jindal-Flores plan for building on “what we see and know to be successful” when it comes to American energy production.

“Free market policies that open access, remove handouts and peel back burdensome regulations will reward risk-taking, stimulate economic growth and provide Americans with affordable energy,” he said.

What the nation shouldn’t pursue, Loris added, is a policy of reducing carbon dioxide.

“That assumes carbon emissions are a problem,” he said.  Instead, “we can recognize that free markets that reward technological innovation can fuel the economy and reduce emissions.”

Watch this video for Jindal’s complete public remarks at The Heritage Foundation.

This article was originally posted at The website.

Biden’s Bullroar: Unions Built American Prosperity


Written by Luke Hamilton

Never one to miss an opportunity to grand-stand, our Vice-President took advantage of the Labor Day weekend to shovel some bullroar on the good people of Detroit. He took to the stump in the Motor City to rattle some cages and rally the rapidly-diminishing troop as only he can. It’s quite fitting that the Vice-President chose Detroit as the backdrop for his performance, given that it’s the poverty-stricken love-child of Organized Labor and Democratic politician.

On a side note, have we ever had a less-professional Presidential administration? If you watch the speech, you’ll see the 2nd most powerful man in the world leaning on the podium like he’s drunk and calling union officials “man”. Clearly it’s too much to ask that Joe maintains a rudimentary grasp of the underlying dynamics involved with major political issues, but couldn’t he borrow a shred of dignity and glue it to his forehead?  It’s strangely poetic that President Choom-Gang picked Delaware’s Jeff Spicoli for his running mate…

The Vice-President’s speech was boilerplate material for the union rank-and-file. He extolled the virtues and benefits of organized labor, mentioning at one point that unions built the middle class in this country which in turn has been the key to America’s prosperity. Really, Joe? Unions built the middle class? I suppose unicorns built the railroads then? If Big Labor was responsible for so much prosperity, then it must follow that more unions mean more prosperity. No need to go any further than the ground he spoke from; Detroit was once the poster child for the success of labor unions and today an estimated 60% of children in the city live in poverty. If unions produce prosperity, why is Detroit the opposite of prosperous?

Sorry Mr. Vice-President, logic and history do not affirm your fabrication of reality. The truth of the matter is that poverty follows organized labor the way moochers follow success. Taking a look at the states which have the highest percentage of unionized workers, we see New York at 24%, Alaska at 23%, and Hawaii at 22.1%. If this data is cross-referenced with the Composite Cost of Living for the first quarter of 2014, culled from information provided to the Council for Community & Economic Research, the states with the highest cost-of-living are Hawaii (#1), New York (#3), and Alaska (#4), thereby confirming the fact that organized labor engenders poverty, not prosperity.

And why is that? Wouldn’t an organization which requires higher pay for manual labor be good for the local economy and American industry? In short, no. The reason why is because organized labor is a form of price control which creates a fissure between market forces. Anytime market forces are fractured, they will not work as they should. When market forces don’t work the way they were designed to work, the relationship between value and cost becomes unstable and this instability leads to economic uncertainty, which in turn leads to economic shrinkage and ultimately, poverty.

Take for example the “Fight for $15” protests going on across the country, where fast food workers are trying to force their employers to pay them $15/hour. If they succeed in their efforts and fast food companies agree to pay all of their employees $15/hour, what’s the big deal? Many of those workers are currently making around $8/hour, so this would mean double the paycheck for doing exactly the same job they did for $8. No additional value has been added, the price of labor has been arbitrarily set, causing a disconnect. The company’s overhead has now effectively doubled, while the revenue hasn’t. Market forces dictate that when a company’s revenue rises, a company can safely increase its overhead. But if the overhead increases without a commensurate increase in revenue, there is a problem. Now companies can deal with this problem, but it isn’t pretty. They have to come up with the extra funds for the increased overhead. To do this, they can a) take this money from company profit, b) increase revenue by raising the price they charge for their goods, or c) reduce the overhead by cutting headcount.

Option A is the choice which most union protests are focused on, but it is the least likely to happen. The reason why is that many companies which seem highly profitable are running on a razor-thin profit margin. Take hospitals for example. They have cutting edge technology and surgeons who make ridiculous amounts of money, but the average net profit across the hospital industry is 3.7%. That kind of profit margin could not absorb a 100% increase in labor costs. “Specialty” eateries like Papa John’s, Panera Bread, and Potbelly Sandwiches run an average of 1.2% net profit across the industry sector. So Option A is almost always off the table. Option B is the route most companies seem to choose these days. They pass the cost of increased labor onto their customers, which usually results in loss of business as consumers find other, more reasonable options. This means even less revenue than before and that leads to a company with an unhealthy economic outlook. It also means that the customers which remain are less prosperous since they have to fork over more moolah than before.

Finally, we have Option C. Companies can decide to do more with less. If your overhead doubles, then you can absorb that increase by cutting your labor force in half. This leads to unemployed Americans, over-worked laborers, and crappy service/products. If fast food workers don’t get back to work, they might find themselves faced with Option C pretty soon. A company named Momentum Machines has built a burger-making robot which can produce one burger every 10 seconds! Word is that the robot is guaranteed to arrive with a microchip which prevents it from being recruited by SEIU.

If you talk about making more money, everyone will stop to listen. But if you advocate doing so in a manner completely divorced from economic forces, the only guaranteed result is financial hardship for yourself and/or the company for which you work. Mr. Vice-President, perhaps it’s time you examined the real reason for America’s once-robust middle class: the wealth-creation machine which is was American free-market capitalism and the market forces harnessed for that creation.

Luke Hamilton is classically-trained, Shakespearean actor from Eugene, Oregon who happens to be a liberty-loving, right-wing, Christian constitutionalist. Hamilton spends his time astride the Illinois-Wisconsin border, leading bands of liberty-starved citizens from the progressive gulags of Illinois to [relative] freedom.  Hamilton is the creative mind/voice behind Pillar & Cloud Productions, a budding production company which resides at  He owes all to his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, whose strength is perfected in his weakness.

Chicago Pastor Endorses Republican Jim Oberweis


Written by

The Rev. Ira J. Acree, a leader in the Illinois faith community, a social justice activist and senior pastor of Greater St. John Bible Church, today announced his endorsement of businessman Jim Oberweis in his bid to unseat Illinois’ Democratic U.S. Senator Dick Durbin. The endorsement from Rev. Acree, a West Side power-broker, comes just days after Oberweis met with African American clergy on the West Side, and where he expressed his commitment to bringing more jobs to the inner city, encouraging business development and supporting initiatives for safe communities.

“Like any other healthy community we want jobs, a thriving economy, great schools and safe neighborhoods,” said Rev. Acree, explaining why he is supporting Oberweis over Durbin. “We clearly have none of the above. The outlook has gotten even worse over the last six years. For decades we have religiously elected Democrats who are not serving our best interests or improving our quality of life. To keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.”

Acree said he’s confident Oberweis has the skills and passion to help remedy the problems residents in under-served communities are addressing. Like a growing number of African leaders in Chicago, Acree said he has become disenchanted with Sen. Dick Durbin, who has failed to participate in any campaigns he has been involved in. And as other African American leaders have expressed, some publicly, but most privately, Durbin’s office simply has not responded or returned phone calls.

“Much of the violence can only be addressed with an economic resolution,” Rev. Acree said. “We need to elect people based on their skill set and policy position rather than their party identification.”

Acree, a staunch Democrat, is part of a growing trend of African American leaders in Chicago endorsing Oberweis. Earlier, Bishop Larry Trotter, the senior pastor of Sweet Holy Spirit Church, and Rev. Corey Brooks, pastor of New Beginnings Church of Chicago, endorsed Oberweis.

Oberweis welcomed the news of the endorsements, and said: “We need all of Illinois working together to solve the issues and to enhance the quality of life in every region of this state. As a member of the U.S. Senate, I look forward to partnering with the faith community, local, state, national and community leaders to make all of Illinois the Illinois we want it to be.”

This article was originally posted at the website.

Who Really Pays?


By Pat Hughes - 

In an interview with CNBC, President Barack Obama said: “if you’re basically still an American company but you’re simply changing your mailing address in order to avoid paying taxes, then you’re really not doing right by the country.”

The real question, however, is not why companies are fleeing the USA (and, likewise, states such as Illinois), but why the political establishment continues to drive them out?

If we are committed to “creating jobs,” does it make sense to levy the highest corporate tax rate in the Western world on our biggest and best job creators?

We are doing it wrong. We should reward what we want to see more of, not punish it. If we want our economy to grow and new jobs to be created, then we need to incentivize localized capital investment and entrepreneurial activity in the private sector. We can start by reducing the tax burden on those that create jobs. U.S. corporations are increasingly at a competitive disadvantage. They currently face the highest statutory corporate income tax rate in the world at 39.1 percent.

Operating under a higher tax rate automatically puts U.S. based firms at a competitive disadvantage to their foreign counterparts. Developments in technology and greater global integration have opened international boundaries. Companies today face fewer road blocks to deter them from relocating their operations to areas that provide the most economically conducive environment. So they leave.

This phenomenon is even more prevalent at the state level where there are fewer costs associated with moving a business from one state to another as opposed to moving it internationally.  A comparison of state governments provides a clear illustration of the relationship between corporate tax rates and a society’s ability to attract economic growth and opportunity.

In Illinois, we are burdened by the fourth highest flat-rate corporate tax in the country.  As a result, businesses are relocating to other states at an accelerating pace. Forbes reported, “Illinois, with 61% more people moving out than in, has a depressing story to tell… over time the state has lost a third of its manufacturing jobs and a quarter of its jobs in construction, and a significant proportion of its unemployed have been out of work for the long term, so the real employment rate there is much higher than the relatively high official figure suggests.”

By contrast, Texas, with no corporate income tax, no property taxes at the state level, and no individual income tax, has one of the lowest tax burdens in the country. “Texas Friendly” is the mantra and that translates into one of the best business climates in the United States.  Likewise, Florida provides a great example of tax policy that works.  The state’s 5.5% flat rate corporate tax puts it among the lowest in the country.  Moreover, because Florida has no income, estate or inheritance tax, it’s an attractive alternative for business owners struggling under the yoke of Illinois taxation.

The politicians currently in power—from President Obama to Governor Quinn—believe the corporate tax punishes the rich and powerful and is, therefore, an indispensable weapon in convincing voters that they are reducing inequality and redistributing wealth—that they are being “fair”.  This a myth, of course, and those that advance it fail to realize the human cost of their policies.  It is a cost borne by our longtime neighbor who was downsized and forced out of his home because a job never came.  It is a cost borne by a son or daughter who must leave their family to find work somewhere else. It is a cost borne by the small business owner who closes the door on his life’s work because he can’t make the numbers work.

When a government that has overspent for years turns to tax increases instead of spending cuts and other structural reforms simply for the sake of “fairness,” it weakens free enterprise, lowers opportunity and impoverishes its people in a variety of ways.

We can do better.  And we must do better for the sake of middle class taxpayers and job seekers who bear the brunt of the demonstrably failed status quo.  The status quo preferred by those who sell a snake oil called “fairness” to consolidate political power.

This article was originally posted at The Illinois Opportunity Project website. 

Roll Up Your Sleeves for Heidi!

Heidi Holan

Written by David E. Smith

The Illinois General Election is just over eight weeks away, and it’s time to roll up our sleeves to help elect great pro-family lawmakers to represent our values in Springfield.

To that end, I am personally asking you to volunteer some time to support the campaign of Heidi Holan who is running for state representative in your district against a pro-abortion, big government incumbent.

Heidi has been a strong voice for our values, working hard to protect parental rights’ policies throughout the state and nation. Illinois risks moral and financial collapse unless we change the status quo and elect candidates of high moral and ethical standards to public office. I am certain that Heidi will be a strong voice for our values in Springfield, but it won’t happen without your help!

And let’s not forget that last year her opponent, State Representative Deborah Conroy, voted to legalize same-sex “marriage” – forcing a radical redefinition of marriage on all the people of Illinois.  Ignoring the pleas of her constituents, Conroy caved in to the LGBTQ lobby and voted with Democrat Speaker Michael Madigan to redefine marriage. Two men can now marry and adopt children because of her help and innocent children in schools will now be taught that homosexuality is normal and that when they grow up, they can marry a man or a woman.

State Representative Conroy also voted for a terrible comprehensive sex-education bill that was supported by Planned Parenthood and the ACLU.  Public school that teach sex education are now mandated to teach “comprehensive” sex education, i.e., condom training, in grades 6-12.  This law will encourage students to engage in risky behavior.  

Children’s natural modesty and innocence are being stripped away with the help of Deb Conroy and Planned Parenthood. And Planned Parenthood IS the nation’s largest abortion clinic provider. What’s the connection?  Former abortion clinic director, Carol Everett, connects the dots.

“How do you sell an abortion? In the U.S. it’s very simple: You do it through sex education.”

Everett ran four abortion clinics in Texas from 1977-1983, where an estimated 35,000 unborn children were aborted before her dramatic conversion and departure from the industry.

Take ACTION: For the future of your children and grandchildren, I am asking you to please dedicate a few hours of your time over the next several weeks to help stop the downward spiral of the state.  If you are able to volunteer, PLEASE do so!

No matter how little or much of your time you’re able to donate, there’s an opportunity for you! Please call David Norck at (630) 390-6511 to learn more.

If you are not able to volunteer your time, but can give a donation to Heidi’s campaign, please send it to:

Citizens for Heidi Holan
P.O. Box 88324
Carol Stream, Illinois  60188

For the good of Illinois and the future of our children, I thank you!

Ad About IRS Scandal Upsets U.S. Senator Durbin

Written by David E. Smith

Our America Fund is broadcasting a political ad (below) targeting Illinois U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, specifically about his involvement in the scandal in which the IRS targeted conservative groups.

Needless to say, Durbin’s campaign is upset with the allogations.

Modified by Matthew