Are We Proud Of Alaska's Newest U.S. Senator? Yes We Are!
(We are also delighted with the new, House Natural Resources Chairman, Rob Bishop. Bishop replaced our longtime hero Chairman Doc Hastings and seems to be effectively and seemlessly moving forward. More here…. -dh)
During his tenure as Alaska's Attorney General Alaska's newest U.S. Senator, Dan Sullivan, brought lawsuits against the federal government for endangering Alaska's constitutionally reliant resource base.
Sullivan later served as Commissioner of Natural Resources, continuing Alaska's stand against hostile instances of federal overreaching jurisdiction.
As the 49th State's new senator, he has quickly demonstrated that knowledge is transferable from one responsible position to another; he is becoming a great colleague for our senior senator, Lisa Murkowski, of whom we are also proud and respectful.
We wanted to make sure today that all of our readers have witnessed Sullivan's transformation and think you will agree with us that this Marine officer, this state law and natural resource expert, this U.S. State Department veteran is in the right place at the right time for Alaska's citizens and for the people of the United States.
Letter from Bunny and Al Chong, Kenai Peninsula:
We did campaign and VOTE for Dan Sullivan. He IS AWESOME!!!
Letter from our reader, Scott Ogan, Seldovia:
Yes Dan is quite the Man!!
After working with him as Alaska's Attorney General and as my Commissioner, I am very pleased that his tenacity is transported to the US Senate. He is a strong leader and does not wilt during barrages of “incomings”.
His Alaskan family is rock solid, as he married one of the Fate girls. I served in the Alaska Legislature with Representative Bud Fate and know his beautiful wife as well. Stalwart Alaskans.
Keep up the good work Dave.
He also respects our allies, including America's largest trading partner, Canada.
Above is a video interview posted today (i.e. revealing his policy views on Iran) and below is the maiden speech Sullivan delivered to his colleagues a month ago (i.e. reflecting strong support for Keystone XL and other common sense energy policies) … for the record.
Semper fi, Senator!
Below is Sullivan's first speech to the United States Senate. It contains facts and background every Alaskan school child should know well. The video documents his ability to understand and defend international diplomacy policy positions.
SENATOR DAN SULLIVAN: MAIDEN SPEECH AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY 1.27.15
Mr. President, today I stand in support of the Keystone Pipeline Project.
As an Alaskan, I feel it’s important to talk about this bill and the importance of American energy infrastructure.
I live in a state with one of the world’s largest pipelines. In 1973, after bitter debate, similar to the debate about Keystone, Congress passed a bill that led to the construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline system– what we in Alaska call TAPS.
It almost didn’t happen. The Vice President at the time, serving as the president of the Senate, cast the tie-breaking vote.
Then, like now, opponents howled. They said TAPS would be an environmental disaster. They said bird and caribou populations would be decimated. But none of that happened. In fact, birds and caribou flourished, showing that we can develop energy infrastructure responsibly with the highest standards in the world – and Alaska proves this every day.
Today, From the office of House Resources Chairman Rob Bishop:
Bishop Rolls Out Committee Agenda, Drills Down on Federal Onshore and Offshore Energy Production
Politico: “Bishop has already moved to increase the panel’s oversight, opening the door for probes on the Endangered Species Act and federal reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. ‘
[NEPA] is a law that has an impact on every aspect of American life,’ Bishop said. And ESA ‘is a perfect example of an act that is not working,’ he said. ‘If it’s for control, then ESA is wonderful. If you’re actually trying to preserve species, it’s not working. And it needs to be reformed.’…Bishop is one of Capitol Hill’s biggest critics of the federal controls on energy production and public lands use, issues the Republicans highlight by pointing to the declining oil and gas output from federal lands…” (Politico, March 2, 2015)
The Larry Kudlow Show (Audio): “We are living in a much more dangerous world than we ever had during the Cold War. And to meet that threat, that environment, we’ve got to use our diplomatic means, our military means, but also our energy opportunities. The United States has today surpassed Russia and Saudi Arabia in producing energy, but that’s all been done on private lands and state lands,” stated Bishop. “If we really are going to take the role so we can be a benefit to our allies and we can play a role with Putin and the Middle East and everywhere else and not be bullied by OPEC, we have to develop the resources on our federal lands and offshore…That’s the bailiwick that I have…” (The Larry Kudlow Show, February 28, 2015)
Morning in America with Bill Bennett (Audio): “The United States is a leader now in energy production, we’ve caught up to the Russians and Saudi Arabians, but we’ve done that all on state and private lands,” stated Bishop. “If the nation is to go forward now and become an economic leader – so we can benefit our allies, we won’t be bullied by OPEC, we can increase our exports, lower the cost of energy here – you’ve got to go onto federal lands and offshore. And that’s the purview of my committee. So we’re not just a western committee anymore. We really have an impact on the entire country as well as foreign policy…” (Morning in America, Bill Bennett, March 2, 2015)
P.O.T.U.S. Sirius XM (Audio): “The United States is becoming an energy leader. We’ve already passed Russia and Saudi Arabia for energy production, but it’s all been on private and state lands,” stated Chairman Rob Bishop. “If we actually want to become a permanent leader in energy: be able to help our allies, not be bullied by OPEC and provide job employment for this country, you’ve got to get the resources on the federal lands and off-shore – and that’s the purview of my committee… what we do here will have an impact on the entire country and even on foreign policy…” (Sirius XM Radio, February 25, 2015)
Wall Street Journal Live (Video): “House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop on President Obama’s proposal to buy more federal land, raise fees and impose new regulations amid maintenance backlogs and wildfires. ‘The [administration] wants to triple the Land and Water Conservation Fund. If you’re going to expand it whatsoever, use that to solve problems not just buy more land that we already have a 21 million backlog on the maintenance of that land as it is…’” (Wall Street Journal Live TV, March 2, 2015)
Houston Chronicle: “Bishop tangles with the White House on energy development. He says the oil and gas revolution has unfolded mostly on private and state land – not the territory under the Interior Department's control. ‘There has to be an overall approach to increasing production on federal property,’ Bishop said. ‘This administration is either slow walking or just stopping that, and that harms the entire country.’ More opportunities for oil and gas drilling on federal lands and waters – and speedier permitting – are essential for the United States to expand its role as a global energy leader, break OPEC's domination and spur domestic jobs, Bishop insisted…" (Houston Chronicle, March 2, 2015)
The Hill (video): “The new chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee sees the Interior Department’s budget as a way to inject creative thinking into issues like oil drilling on federal land and offshore…Bishop said one of his top priorities as chairman and in overseeing Interior’s budget will be to establish an energy portfolio that encourages more oil and natural gas drilling on federally owned lands and offshore… ‘We have already surpassed Russia and Saudi Arabia in energy production, but if we actually want to be a leader in the world in energy production and provide jobs from it, we’re going to have to develop our resources that are on federal land and offshore – and that’s the purview of my committee…’” (The Hill, February, 24, 2015)
Washington Examiner: "GOP lawmakers want states to get more control of the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a 50-year-old program that is funded by offshore oil-and-gas drilling royalties…Many are dissatisfied with the states' share and the federal government using a bulk of its funds to acquire more land. ‘If problems are going to be solved, we have to think differently,’ said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Rob Bishop, R-Utah, whose panel has jurisdiction over the program. ‘The voices talking about [the conservation fund] right now lack creativity.’ Bishop said he wants better oversight of how the federal funds are used. He contends those dollars would be better spent maintaining roads, trails and buildings at facilities managed by the Interior Department, and that more funds should be given to states to enhance local infrastructure and recreation opportunities…" (Washington Examiner, February, 23, 2015)
Huffington Post: "As the new chair of the House Natural Resources Committee, Rep. Rob Bishop may be ready to spar with the Obama administration on some key public lands and energy issues. But he's also setting a different tone from that of his predecessor, encouraging conservation advocates to think they may be able to find common ground this Congress. Bishop, a seven-term Republican representing Utah's 1st District, took over the chairmanship in January from retiring Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.), who had held that post since 2011…” (Huffington Post, February 20, 2015)
E&E TV: On Point (Video): “The United States has become a player in the energy world. We’ve surpassed the Russians and Saudi Arabians in what we’ve been able to produce in oil and gas, but it’s all come on private and state lands. If the United States is going to really become a leader in energy development and actually be of value to our allies and not be pushed around by OPEC anymore, if we’re actually going to have the jobs that can be created by affordable energy, you have to start the advancement of resources on federal lands as well…” (E&E TV, February 25, 2015)
Bloomberg BNA: “Bishop told Bloomberg BNA March 3 that the committee will be looking at short-term action on the Land and Water Conservation Fund, offshore fisheries management, two programs of federal assistance to counties and schools in rural areas, potential legislation on federal forest management and regulation of natural gas pipelines and electric transmission lines that cross federal lands and…Oil and gas companies and some lawmakers have argued that one reason for the recently large amounts of natural gas flaring—the burning off of gas that emerges as a co-product of oil production—is that the federal government is slow to issue permits for pipelines to take gas away from shale oil and gas regions.‘Actually, the rights-of-way issue is something that is personally important to me,’Bishop said. Another energy issue is the Bureau of Land Management's pending final rule to update regulations governing oil and gas production on federal lands, a rule with a special emphasis on hydraulic fracturing but much broader application as a set of standards to safeguard well integrity…” (March 4, 2015, Bloomberg BNA)
Today's American Energy Alliance Energy Clips:
I guess the EPA wasn't expecting the states to pass up all that "flexibility".
PoliticoPro (3/10/15) reports: “Supporters of President Barack Obama’s climate regulations are getting worried EPA may have few tools to use if states decide to follow conservatives’ advice and refuse to cooperate with the agency on climate change regulations. Questions abound about how the agency would impose its own climate plans on behalf of states or make sure the states that do submit plans actually stick to them. Also up in the air: whether the agency has the right to hit the violators with penalties that could even include the loss of federal highway dollars — one of the main fiscal weapons Washington has used to get states to toe the line on everything from motorcycle helmet laws to underage drinking. But the agency is declining to say whether highway dollars would actually be at risk.”
Bright Bulb Award:
“There remains a strong social contract between scientists who are funded by the government, and the IPCC that supports the government’s political agenda. The feedbacks supporting this social contract in principle can be reversed; it remains to be seen what, if anything, will trigger this reversal. I suspect that it will be the climate itself, if the hiatus/pause/slow down continues.”
We did the math. Clinton’s 55,000 page print job emitted as much carbon as the average American does in one year.
Energy Townhall (3/10/15) reports: “Printing Hillary Clinton’s 55,000 pages of emails emitted nearly 40,000 pounds of greenhouse gases about as much as the average American produces about that amount in one year. Clinton’s extravagant print job comes less than six months after her stump speech to national environmentalist groups about the urgent need for reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, following in the long line of executive branch transparency issues, has finally released at least a partial record of her emails to the State Department. Clinton had previously kept the emails on a homebrew email server, thus avoiding both government email security measures and FOIA requests. This is likely also in violation of federal law if any matters that were Classified or Sensitive But Unclassified were sent to her email or if she send any sensitive emails. Unfortunately, the incomplete emails the Clinton camp released were done so not on a modern, digital format, but were actually physically printed, using over 55,000 pieces of paper. Though many older politicians may find modern technology like PDFs, email, and flash drives befuddling, we imagine leftist politicos like Hillary Clinton would at least understand the environmental consequences of their actions.”
Swiss make cheese out of the carbon tax. Guess which kind?
The Wall Street Journal (3/8/15) reports: “Swiss voters Sunday overwhelmingly rejected an initiative that would have scrapped the Alpine country’s value-added-tax system and replaced it with a carbon tax, a move that would have made gasoline, heating oil and other forms of power more expensive for consumers. Roughly 92% of voters opposed the initiative, known as “Energy Rather than VAT,” while 8% supported the measure, according to preliminary results from 13 of the country’s 26 cantons. The initiative would have encouraged Swiss households to use renewable energy sources, including solar and wind, which would have been exempt from taxes. The initiative, which was introduced by the Green Liberal Party of Switzerland, was designed to help lower carbon emissions and reduce global warming.”
How many decades does it take for a temporary subsidy to be called permanent?
The Washington Times (3/7/15) reports: “Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said that a federal program promoting wind energy production, which recently expired, has worked and should be renewed for at least a few more years before being phased out altogether. Mr. Bush has returned to Iowa for the first time since announcing in December that he was interested in running for president. Last week, he appeared at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference outside Washington, and on Saturday he was among a number of likely GOP presidential candidates that flocked to the Iowa Agricultural Summit, hosted by Bruce L. Rastetter, a major GOP donor.”
Why we fight.
The Guardian (3/9/15) editorializes: “The actual story: what happens at Paris will be, at best, one small part of the climate story, one more skirmish in the long, hard-fought road to climate sanity. What comes before and after will count more. And to the extent Paris matters, its success will depend not on the character of our leaders but on how much a resurgent climate movement has softened up the fossil fuel industry, and how much pressure the politicians feel to deliver something.”
It's easy to get up from rock bottom.
The Washington Post (3/9/15) reports: “In the grand scheme of things, one year — 2014 — only represents a slight nudging of the gigantic ship of U.S. energy in a renewable direction. Even if it grew less, coal is still the No. 1 source of net generation each year in the United States, followed by natural gas. And the numbers for these two sources still dwarf the totals for all renewable sources combined. Still, there can be no denying that the U.S. energy system is changing, and that renewables — wind and solar — are booming. Whether they’re doing so fast enough to decarbonize our world before we pass the threshold that would bring on dangerous climate change, however, is another matter.”