Obama health care obsession killing America?

Another crisis now "inevitable"

Health care is going to bankrupt America?

Perhaps, if things don't change significantly in the coming years and decades, but we might not have to worry if the President and Congress stay on their current path.

Without more stringent financial system reforms, "another crisis – a bigger crisis that weakens both our financial sector and our larger economy – is more than predictable, it is inevitable," claims a Report commissioned by the nonpartisan Roosevelt Institute.

While Congress is set to vote on regulatory reform proposals essentially crafted by Democrats, a plethora of bipartisan experts are warning that the current bill "must be beefed up to prevent banks from continuing to engage in high-risk investing that precipitated the near-collapse of the U.S. economy in 2008."

Instead, health care and Toyotagate have controlled the attention of Congress and the President. Assuredly, both are serious issues, but are they the most serious issues facing America right now? Even worse, when Democrats have focused on financial reform, their focus has mostly been limited to consumer protections.

Yet, Today's Investor's Business Daily, for instance, claims that consumer protections had nothing to do with the previous crisis. That might not mean much coming from a pro-business publication on its own, however, the Roosevelt Institute report strongly confirms much of IBD's contention. Ultimately, it's not necessarily that consumer protection laws aren't worthy of reform, although IBD does make that assertion, it's that such reforms will do little - if anything - to prevent the financial system from causing an even greater crisis now that there are fewer banks.

"Risk-taking at banks," LOUDLY warns the Roosevelt Report, "will soon be larger than ever."

As ABC paraphrases, "The report warns that the country is now immersed in a "doomsday cycle" wherein banks use borrowed money to take massive risks in an attempt to pay big dividends to shareholders and big bonuses to management – and when the risks go wrong, the banks receive taxpayer bailouts from the government."

Yet, Congress has done and is doing little to prevent this problem.

Obviously, health care is an important topic that must be addressed, but now is not the time to make health care the Administration's central focus. Besides, with so much low-hanging, bi-partisan fruit on the health care tree, why not just pick it? Let's just get health care reform rolling. Even a baby step can quickly turn into a sprint.

For now, let's just make sure that the loopholes in our financial system don't destroy the American economy long before any health care reforms can lead to any financial gains.

Rangel breaks law, I mean Congressional rule

Only some bribes are really bribes?

Charlie got busted.

Listen. I like Charlie Rangel. I have no doubts that, overall, Rangel is probably a pretty cool guy.

Still, he took 'bribe' money whether he knew it or not, and he probably knew it - or at least someone very close to him did. That might be OK if Rangel was some wet-behind-the-ears freshman Congressman, but he's not, he's a 40-year veteran whom knows how the game is played.

And that's the problem. Congress is just a game, a power grab. And both political parties - the system - are always 'ALL IN'.

That's why it's time to vote against the incumbents. I don't just mean Charlie Rangel because of some minor ethics violation. I mean John McCain and EVERY other incumbent as well.

It's not personal. It's not even political. It's just time for change, REAL change.

Toyotagate: Congress makes Toyota look like a Saint

10,000 deaths per year

34 deaths. That's what Toyota's unintended acceleration scandal has caused.

Yes. It's horrible and Toyota deserves some vilification, nonetheless, as I wrote for Soultek.com, "for more than a decade Congress let 10 - 20,000 people die every year because it was good for the Big 3 and it was good for Big Oil.

I mean, c'mon. What would you do if you knew you could save 10,000 lives per year by forcing automakers to build a slightly less profitable vehicle?

Well, for decades Congress certainly hasn't done much. The US auto industry is just too important, so important, in fact, that 10,000 lives per year have been expendable. Yet, Congress is in an uproar over 34 deaths?

How did these 34 deaths become so much more important than the 10's of thousands killed by unnecessary rollover deaths?

How can Congress be so biased? So blinded? Isn't it obvious?

We the people have only one voice left, our vote, and while many might believe the vote to be irrelevant and meaningless, I assure you, the vote can have meaning if we work together and vote against the incumbents.

Rasmussen Poll - 71 percent give Congress 'poor' rating

What would the Founders think?

Just like many recent polls, the latest Rasmussen poll finds that 71 percent of Americans think Congress is doing a 'poor' job, and only 10 percent believe Congress is doing a good job.

According to Rasmussen, "(70%) of voters say Congress has not passed any legislation that would significantly improve life".

So, what would the Founders think?

My guess is that they'd wonder why the voters haven't yet acted. It's time to clean house. It's time to vote against the incumbents.

Time for Congressional term limits?

President Obama can only serve 8 years

Some are calling President Obama the greatest President ever. I think it's way too early to make such a statement. However, if Obama does become the greatest President ever, he can still only serve the US as President for 8 years, or two terms.

However, many in Congress have been in Congress for decades, as there are no term limits. Is that really fair?

Should there be term limits in Congress? Or, should Presidents be able to serve for as long as the people will elect them?

Does Congress represent you?

Rate whether Congress represents you. Rate Congress.

Congress wants a payraise?

"Despite low approval ratings and hard feelings from last year's elections, Democrats and Republicans in the House are reaching out for an approximately $4,400 pay raise that would increase their salaries to almost $170,000." (MyWay)

Are you kidding me?

If Congress is so unhappy with their pay, perhaps they should retire from office?

Foreign oil dependency: Jobs versus National Security

Can America survive a couple more decades of foreign oil dependency?

So, the Senate has already watered down their original CAFE plan, and more diluting should be expected in the House, as Detroit-influenced lobbyists storm the halls of Congress. When all is said and done, you'll probably be able to drive a fleet of Hummers through all the gaping CAFE loopholes.

Obviously, Detroit has no choice. When around 70 percent of your business comes from selling the most fuel-inefficient vehicles, the phrase 'fuel economy' becomes fighting words. Besides, isn't Detroit just trying to protect American jobs and an important part of America's economy?

Yet, are those jobs more important than National Security? When a line can be drawn from the first Persian Gulf War to Bin Laden to 9/11 to Afghanistan back to Iraq because of foreign oil dependency, isn't it time to start asking serious questions and to take serious actions?

Fuel economy tearing Congress apart?

Can she lead the House on fuel economy?

Forcing automakers to develop significantly more fuel efficient automobiles is proving to be no easy task - something which should be a surprise to no one.

According to Reuters, "The U.S. Senate struggled on Wednesday to reach a compromise on proposals to increase vehicle fuel efficiency, a major sticking point in broad-based energy legislation." In addition, " Unable to reach a consensus among Democrats, a House of Representatives committee said this week it would delay consideration of its fuel economy and global warming proposals until autumn."

Gallup: America thinks both parties suck

Congress can't get no respect

"The honeymoon phase is over for the new Congress, as the public's ratings of Congress are down again this month. The latest congressional job approval rating (24%) is the lowest for the institution since Democrats took control of both houses in January, and is far below the 37% registered in February. The decline has been most evident among Democrats, whose ratings of Congress now match those of Republicans."

CAFE: Proof of the dysfunctional-ity of Congress?

Expect a weak, pork-filled bill?

If new CAFE legislation coming out of Washington proves one thing, it's the dysfunctional-ity of Congress.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said he strongly opposed the committee's draft, calling it "deeply flawed""It doesn't step up to the urgent challenge. It blinks and then steps back," he said. Waxman also quoted New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman who said "you could drive a Hummer through the gap between our words and deeds."

Yet, the committee's draft has essentially been crafted by Waxman's fellow Democrats. Not that Republicans should rejoice in the hypocrisy of the Democrat Party - at least the Democrats are doing something. Unfortunately, despite the strong rhetoric coming out of Democrats on issues, such as global warming, little action is actually taking place.

What CAFE really proves - a fact most Americans recognize according to most polls - is that Congress has become just shy of useless - at least for the people. Fortunately for Congress, we the people, are too lazy and complacent to do anything about it.

Memorial Day - Celebrate Foreign Oil Dependence!

Honor our soldiers by buying a foreign-oil dependence-increasing gas-guzzler?

Heading into the Memorial Day Weekend, U.S. automakers are beginning an ad campaign to convince Americans that CAFE increases are bad for America. Such a move, they argue, is too expensive, too limiting and too unsafe.

How safe and cost effective is America's foreign oil dependence?

The world is on the brink of massive chaos - chaos significantly created and nurtured by America's dependence upon cheap, foreign oil - yet we do nothing? Even worse, heading into the Memorial Day weekend, U.S. automakers launch a campaign to warn America about the dangers of trying to do something about foreign oil dependency?

Nice timing.

Still, I understand that it won't be easy to end foreign oil dependency - it's our generation's moonshot, some have called it. But with every crisis there is an opportunity.

Detroit needs to stop telling America that's it too expensive to end foreign oil dependence. Rather Detroit needs to work with Congress to create a real-world plan to end foreign oil dependency.

Enough partisanship. Enough politics. Enough profiteering. It's time for action, not excuses. It's time for leadership.

The benefits of ending foreign oil dependency could revolutionize the U.S. auto industry and U.S. manufacturing, while inspiring a nation to greatness. The costs of not acting, however, threaten not just the U.S. auto industry, but the entire U.S. economy - not to mention our security.

Will we, the consumers, voters and tax-payers of America, demand it?

Pelosi to break almost 200 year old procedure?

First change to the germaneness rule since 1822

According to the Drudgereport, "After losing a string of embarrassing votes on the House floor because of procedural maneuvering, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has decided to change the current House Rules to completely shut down the floor to the minority.

The Democratic Leadership is threatening to change the current House Rules regarding the Republican right to the Motion to Recommit or the test of germaneness on the motion to recommit."

So, would such a move end partisanship and enable Congress to accomplish something? Or, would such a move create more partisanship and lead to an even less productive Congress?

Bush more popular than Congress?!?!

Bush testing out a plug-in hybrid vehicle

George Bush is unpopular. That's no secret. According to the most recent Gallup Poll, Bush's approval rating is holding steady at about 33 percent. This low approval rating led many to believe that the unpopular President helped lead to a Democrat-controlled Congress.

But is that the real story?

According to the same Gallup poll, Congress has an approval rating of just 29 percent. Congress is even less popular than the President?

I think Democrats better wake up, as better Republicans. Ultimately, Democrats probably won control of Congress simply because they weren't Republicans - that's it. It was a vote for change that gave Democrats control of Congress.

Yet, has anything really changed? Certainly, the gross, unproductive partisanship of Congress has not changed, and nothing is being accomplished. Even worse, it is possible that essentially nothing will be accomplished until early 2008 - at best.

Perhaps in 2008, when America again votes for change, it shouldn't be limited to replacing Democrats with Republicans or vice versa. Instead, perhaps EVERY incumbent should be replaced?! Perhaps EVERY incumbent should be replaced with an Independent candidate?

Now that would be a change. Seriously, could it get any worse? When the best that is accomplished is, well, nothing, can it really get any worse?

Register to vote. Take a stand for change in 2008.

Not just the President: America is also mad at Congress

Get rid of all the incumbents?

The people of the U.S. are not very happy with the job the President is doing according to every poll. A new poll, however, indicates the people are just as unhappy with Congress, despite a switch from Republican control to Democrat control.

"The survey found only 35 percent approve of how Congress is handling its job, down 5 percentage points in a month. That gives lawmakers the same bleak approval rating as Bush, who has been mired at about that level since last fall, including his dip to a record low for the AP-Ipsos poll of 32 percent last January." (GuardianUnlimited)

If we expect change, isn't it time to really change Congress? So, register to vote and lets vote out the incumbents - ALL of them. Yes, a few good people will be lost, but isn't it time for a fresh start?

Hybrid tax credits: Now Barack, not later

Time to give Toyota some credit!

Congress sucks. Numerous Democrats and Republicans have been speaking about foreign oil dependency and global warming for at least a couple of years now, yet they've done little, despite the fact that a majority agree action is necessary.

O.K. Forget the past.

Barack Obama has now claimed that if he becomes President, he's going to push and to help U.S. automakers to develop hybrid cars. In addition, he also wants to change the tax credit for hybrid vehicles so that there is no cap by manufacturer - something Obama has also proposed as a legislator.

So, what are we waiting for? Foreign oil dependency and global warming are important, but not important enough .......(more).

Hybrid vehicles and bio-fuels: Congress sucks!

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

Democrats prove Congressional waste is non-partisan

While Democrats won over Congress by simply not being Republicans, they are acting just like Republicans now that they are in power. Apparently, America's danger spots, in terms of National Security, are now places like Belgium and the Caribbean.

Rep. Bennie Thompson of Mississippi said he toured the Caribbean because he now chairs the Homeland Security Committee and wanted to see vacation hot spots to “examine border security and port security.” Boy, isn't that convenient?

Isn't it time for Americans to accept the fact that both Republicans and Democrats suck?

Voting out Republicans was O.K., but the focus should have been to vote out ALL incumbents. Party politics don't help the people, just the parties.

(Source: Examiner)

Foreign oil dependence, flex-fuel lies, and hybrid vehicle tax credits: Is Congress failing America?

"A public advocacy group on Thursday said Ford Motor Co. has avoided as much as $135 million in fines by marketing vehicles that are supposed to run on the gas-ethanol mix E85 that don't work and accused the company of running misleading ads." (more)

Moreover, aside from the obvious, the fact is that for years the majority of flex-fuel vehicles sold by both Ford and GM have not ever filled up with E-85. Yet, each company has avoided millions and and millions in fines by selling these vehicles.

"Public Citizen and other environmental advocacy groups have long complained that automakers get credits to meet federal fuel economy regulations by building flexible-fuel vehicles that are hardly ever filled with E85, since it's available at just 900 of the country's 170,000 pumps."

So, Congress gives small business owners huge tax incentives to buy the worst gas-guzzlers, provides huge tax incentives to oil companies, enables the big three to avoid 100's of millions of dollars in fines for violating fuel economy regulations - increasing our foreign oil dependency, and limits tax credits for Toyota hybrid vehicles because they are too successful.

That sure sounds like the right path towards achieving energy independence.

Even the President says hybrids are possibly the most important way to change consumer behavior. Yet, Congress hasn't passed proposed legislation to provide small business tax incentives for buying hybrid cars or other fuel efficient vehicles, nor has Congress passed proposed legislation to extend hybrid vehicle tax credits.

Good work, ladies and gentlemen!

We live in a country that blames the President for quite a lot these days. Fair enough. Let's extend at least as much blame to the current - do nothing, partisanship is more important - Congress.

Flex fuel lies, foreign oil dependency and hybrid vehicle tax credits - Congress is failing America.

Are you an angry voter? Planning to vote against incumbents?

A new poll suggests that the majority of Americans are angry about how the country is being run and they plan to vote against incumbents (more).

Are you an angry voter? Why?

I'm an angry voter. Of course, since both sides of the aisle have decided to make partisanship their main platform, is it really surprising that nothing good is coming out of Congress?

While I'm totally for voting against incumbents, I do believe that little will change without a higher American voter turnout. Moreover, I think we shouldn't just vote against incumbents, we should vote for outsiders.

I say forget the career politicians. I say forget the die-hard Republicans AND Democrats.

A vote for change requires real change - a completely new voice, a completely new platform.

Rate your incumbent anger!

Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House: Let's hope not

If Democrats take back control of Congress, then Nancy Pelosi will probably be the Speaker of the House. Will that be good for America?

Before we answer that question, let's discuss two issues.

First, what is the essence of Democracy? Is it one person one vote? If so, why does that mean anything? Isn't it really that Democracy, at its best, leads to consensus? That's why one person, one vote is so important, because consensus makes it hard for one person, one party, one way of thinking to dominate all aspects of American political life?

Let's face it, very rarely, if ever, does one person, one way of thinking, offer the answers to everything.

Second, so social security is in PERFECT shape? Every single person alive today has NOTHING to worry about when it comes to social security? When we all retire, we will all EASILY be able to live off of social security, right?

I ask the second question, because that is what Nancy Pelosi forced all Democrats to agree upon when George Bush said social security was flawed.

So, why do you then have a pension plan, a 401k plan? Why do Democrat-controlled Unions demand such great health care and pension plans for members if social security is so PERFECT?

In reality, relying on social security in retirement will lead to only one thing for most Americans: the poor house.

The truth is, social security is VERY flawed. Those of us in our 20s, 30s and 40s will almost certainly face serious shortages when it comes to social security. Yet, Nancy tells us there is NO problem.

Why?

Because George Bush, vis-a-vis Republicans, must fail at everything so that Democrats can control America's Democracy. Partisanship, not consensus, rules the world of Nancy Pelosi and the leaders of the Democrat Party. Unfortunately, partisanship also rules the world of the Republican Party.

Both parties are far more focused on raising money and on fighting the other side, than on consensus - the essence of Democracy.

Of course, multi-millionaires, such as Mrs. Pelosi and many other members of Congress, don't have to worry about social security - EVER.

Instead, they worry about POWER and the CONTROL of America's Democracy.

George Bush has not been a great President, but Congress - on both sides of the aisle - has been just as bad, if not worse.

America is a divided country. We speak different languages, we practice different forms of religion or no religion, and we have different political views on many different issues. This isn't bad, this is good. The opposite is the Taliban, it's facist Germany.

Why can't Mrs. Pelosi and the leaders of both parties respect these differing views? Why do they act more like facists than leaders of Democracy?

What happens if Mrs. Pelosi wins the role of Speaker, but accomplishes nothing because of extreme partisanship? Sure there is room for the likes of Mrs. Pelosi and Mr. Tom Delay in politics, but on the fringes of the party, not in a leadership role.

Ultimately, in order for a divided America to achieve great things, concensus will be required.

Blame both political parties for high gas prices

O.K., so Republicans have ties to big oil, that's obvious. But can you really blame high oil prices completely on Republicans, especially when the price of oil is decided in the open markets by traders trading future shares of oil every single second of the business day? How do you manipulate that? Still, Republicans deserve criticism for their close oil ties.

In addition to oil, Democrats ridicule the President's minor CAFE updates, and they are minor. In fact, they are essentially worthless. Yet, less than a year ago, when Congress had a chance to significantly update CAFE, did Democrats make a stand? Heck no. How would Democrats funded by the labor unions that 'protect' autoworkers explain this to the Union leadership, to the workers that would lose their jobs - and to a huge endorsement and source of campaign money?

In reality, when it comes to high gasoline prices, Democrats are very dirty.

That's what makes the new Harbour Report North America 2006 so darn interesting. The Harbour report studies the efficiency of automobile production in the U.S. Surprise, surprise Japanese automakers, even those in America with American autoworkers, are more efficient than American automakers.

While Detroit is closing the gap, this gap still exists and has existed for decades. Today it takes the most efficient Japanese automaker 7.33 hours less per vehicle in labor hours compared to the least efficient American automaker. Less than 10 years, in 1998, the number was 16.56 hours.

What does this number mean? Ultimately, if you spend less time per vehicle, it is because you have less problems, or better quality. Thus, American workers working for American automakers have been spending far more hours producing vehicles of far less quality than American workers working for Japanese automakers.

Again, this has been going on for DECADES. Is there really any wonder why Detroit has faltered over the years?

Detroits problems are far larger than just currency, or benefits, such as skyrocketing health care costs. For decades American automakers have been producing inferior products while spending a lot more time - thus money - doing it, and labor unions have been a huge part of that problem.

Sure labor unions have helped provide good wages and benefits for American autoworkers, but they have also contributed to creating an uncompetitive, inefficient American auto industry.

According to the Detroit News much of the recent gain in American automaker efficiency has "come as a result of progressive operating agreements the company has negotiated with the United Auto Workers union. The deals limit job classifications and rely on a team-based approach to manufacturing."

Shouldn't this have been handled a decade or two ago?

Consequently, for decades, Democrats have significantly contributed to the trend of gas-guzzling in the USA. Despite their rhetoric, and perhaps unintentionally, Democrats are probably more responsible for the SUV craze in America than Republicans. While American automakers do produce fuel efficient vehicles, most of them are produced outside of the United States. U.S. automakers largely produce ONLY foreign oil gas-guzzling vehicles in the States, and to a large extent, Detroit has had no choice. Only gas-guzzling SUVs provide enough profit to keep the Unions happy and the company afloat.

When it comes to America's foreign oil, gas-guzzling culture, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Even worse, as we head into 2008, little seems likely to change. Recently Hillary Clinton sided herself with Detroit and has skewed her focus more towards oil companies and their lack of E85, rather than the monstrous gas-guzzlers coming out of Detroit.

Ironically, even oil man, President Bush, has told Detroit to build more "relevant" vehicles, such as hybrid cars. Without more fuel efficient vehicles, E85 will be a program that America spends billions of tax payer dollars on, yet it will result in little change.

Well, I guess that sounds about right for big party American politics.

Re: Report Rebuts Bush on Spying

I read the article, Report Rebuts Bush on Spying in the Washington Post, and I didn't think much of it. While I'm not opposed to an investigation into the issue, how can any judgement be made without knowing all the facts? Since much of the program is top secret, then the Congressional Research Service really can't fully study the spying program in full detail, correct?

Nonetheless, American privacy is an important issue, and an unbiased investigation might be worthwhile. Unfortunately, Washington isn't capable of an unbiased investigation.

After reading the story, I checked out some blogs and found myself at fatcat politics. Fatcat isn't really about fatcat politics, it is about slandering Republicans.

O.K., that is fine. Many Republicans are funded by fatcat corporations and lobbyists, but so too are many Democrats.

Man, I really tire of elitist Democrats. While I probably agree more with Democrats on many issues, I actually trust Republicans more. While I rarely, if ever, vote for Republicans - I would vote for McCain - they seem to at least stand for consistency. Too often Dems. just seem to stand against things, not for things. I say either lead, follow, or get the F _ CK out of the way.

While I wasn't a big fan of Hillary when Bill took office, you have to give the Clintons credit, they tried to lead and I sometimes think Hillary might prove to be much more of President than her husband - she won't be chasing young interns. (I'm an independant, dammit, how can I be plugging Hillary?)They tried to take on health care, much the same way Bush tried to take on Social Security. That's leadership.

That's why I was annoyed by an image on fatcat linking corporations, Republicans and the Iraq War. Let's face it, corporate money dominates all politicians in one way or another. Anyway, below is what I wrote:

____________________________________________________________

Wow, the Iron Triangle?

So the Iron Triangle doesn't include both Dems and Repubs? Democrats don't have any corporate ties?

Anyway, it seems to me we went to war in Iraq in an attempt to stabilize the Middle East, and WMD was a piece of evidence - now proven largely incorrect - as to why the area needed to be stabilized in the war against terrorism, but it was by no means THE reason.

Now you can argue that Iraq wasn't a good method for stabilizing the Middle East or for fighting terrorism, but that doesn't seem to be what you are doing.

You just want to slander Republicans. Fine, I don't really care because I see both parties as the problem.

Still, in reality almost every smoking gun against Bush and going to Iraq used by Democrats now, was available to Democrats before the war, yet they went along.

It's sort of ironic that you think Iraq was about WMD and Zarqawi sees Iraq as a battle between Islam and Democracy, which seems to give some credence to the Bush belief.

You obviously hate Bush and have always hated Bush, so your glasses are only focused on proving your point that Bush sucks, rather than focusing on the real problems of the Iron Triangle and the real problems of fatcat politics.

Please understand I am not defending Bush, but the Iron Triangle and 'fatcat' politics have run both parties since both parties were founded. Let's be fair if we really want this to change.

In reality being a Democrat isn't NEARLY enough. In fact, it might not be helpful at all.

If that isn't true why is incumbency, in both parties, just a few percent under 100%? Why did Carville say the last election would be determined by just 3% of voting Americans? Why do average members - regardless of party - leave Congress much richer than when they started?

Groups like the UAW, for example, inevitably, collude with GM at times. That's why a number of Dems voted against increased fuel efficiency standards this last fall, when they had the numbers to make it happen. Instead, they wanted their piece of the corporate pie - the same corporate money they use to fund the Democratic party.

Do the ends always justify the means?

Pretending like this is just a Republican issue will only guarantee that very little will change. So congratulations, perhaps you will impeach Bush, but you'll still accomplish nothing regarding fat cat politics.

Thus, is this really a 'fatcat politics' site, or just a 'I hate Republicans site'?

_____________________________________________________

Anyway, to me, this is just more reason to register to vote. Again, if you don't believe in either party, you still need to vote. Vote for a third party if you don't want to vote for either major party, but PLEASE vote.

If we think so many politicians are corrupt, why do we keep voting for them?

According to a CNN poll, over half the people believe that the majority of those in Congress are corrupt.

This isn't a new trend in politics. The belief that Congress is corrupt has been an ever-growing sentiment, and a sentiment that Bill Clinton successfully utilized to become President.

Yet, if so many believe that those in Congress are so corrupt, why is the rate of incumbency so high? Are 'the people' so disgusted they just choose not to vote?

GET REGISTERED TO VOTE. Don't just complain. Vote. If you don't think your vote counts, then vote Independent or for the Green Party. Who cares if they don't win, your vote can still send a message, even if your candidate doesn't win.

If you think those in Congress are corrupt and you aren't even registered to vote, then I think your more stupid than they are corrupt. So elevate your intelligence and register to vote.

Exxon's $9 billion oil profit: Why is Congress giving tax dollars to oil companies?

From Hybridcarblog.com

Hybrid cars are not the answer to today's oil problems. Sure, everyone could drive a Toyota Prius and America could end foreign oil dependency, but one vehicle isn't going to save America from foreign oil. Even if everyone wanted to drive a Prius it would still take years before that many hybrids could even be produced.

Thus, critics dismiss hybrids as hype, noting that today's hybrid technology costs do not justify the savings in fuel economy. As if investment never leads to cheaper costs and better technology - I mean look at computers, what a wasted investment!

Instead, America would rather rely on big energy, such as Exxon Mobil. That's right, the same Exxon Mobil that "said Thursday high oil and natural-gas prices helped its third-quarter profit surge almost 75 percent to $9.92 billion" according to the AP. The same Exxon Mobil that is going to be given tax payer money to help alleviate the oil shortage in America.

Now, that's a plan!

And we're going to need more oil, a lot more oil, not only in the U.S., but worldwide. Unfortunately, that oil might not exist. According to an extremely interesting NYTIMES article, Doubts Raised on Saudi Vow for More Oil, Saudi Arabia might have far less oil than they have been proclaiming to the world, and a serious oil crunch could be just around the corner.

Don't worry, I'm sure Exxon will use some of its profits and tax payer incentives to help out the average American!

If oil supplies do stagnate, where is the oil going to come from to run all the diesels that are going to save America according to the Detroit News? Nothing like putting all your eggs in one basket.

Why not invest in technology?

Experimental hybrid vehicles have already been built that can achieve more than 100 mpg, some even achieve as much as 250 mpg, and others have claimed that a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid could achieve as much as 500 mpg. Additionally, flex fuel plug-in hybrids could utilize gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, electricity or even hydrogen. Is that too many options?

What the hell are we waiting for? Why does America continue to provide tax dollars to the oil industry? Why do we allow automakers, including Toyota, to continue to sell gas-guzzlers? Why not subsidize the cost of a fleet of Ford Escape hybrids and Toyota Highlander hybrids that achieve at least 50 mpg? That technology exists right now, yet instead we give billions to oil companies?

Oil, not technology, is the solution to America's problems, at least if you ask Congress. I guess almost 10 billion in profits provides a lot of favors.

So yeah, 100 mpg hybrids are too expensive and hybrids are just hype, but spending billions and billions on oil companies, oil refineries, the hydrogen highway, and fuel cells is a bargain - at least for Exxon Mobil it is.


Register to Vote!

The future of hybrid cars and Congress

I was recently interviewed for an article regarding hybrid cars and the question posed to me was, "Will the hybrid powertrain be the dominant powertrain by 2012?"

While I said that it would not, I noted that analysts currently predicting total hybrid sales achieving just 5% of the market by 2012, were just as wrong in that prediction as they were when they predicted the complete failure of the Toyota Prius.

Just today the article, Forget hybrids, America; diesels will provide economy, performance argues that America should focus on diesel, not hybrids, especially because Ford is a leading player.

So now diesel is the answer to America's oil problems? Please!

According to Ken Miller, an oil industry analyst with Purvin & Gertz in Houston, "New environmental rules for diesel will go into effect on Jan. 1 that are expected to add a few more cents per gallon to the cost of diesel. The day when diesel was cheaper than gasoline is probably over." (AutoWeek) Yet, diesel is the answer?

Others might say that bio-diesel can make diesel vehicles cheaper to run, but I doubt this to be true if a significant percentage of Americans begin to drive bio-diesel. Where will the fuel come from? What if severe weather causes drought or storm that destroys fuel crops? Bio-diesel can absolutely help end foreign oil dependency, but it cannot do it alone.

I say build flex-fuel hybrids because doing so could save America as much as a trillion dollars (more).

There was a time when technology was the strength of America, yet today, the strength of America seems controlled by whether oil is cheap or not. Additionally, many automotive writers, probably the ones who refused to use a computer for as long as possible, continue to wear blinders.

How many more conflicts in the Middle East, how much more evidence of pollution and global warming, how much more evidence that America is continually losing its technological stronghold, will it take before America embraces the future - a future that will be dominated by technology, not cheap oil?

America has for too long chosen the easy path, a path that has been enforced by military power and executed with a complete disregard for the environment. Suddenly, however, the easy path is neither so easy, nor cost-effective.

While hybrid cars might not dominate the future, hybrid technology is just an emerging technology that can lead to 100 mpg fuel efficiency within 10 years if automakers create bio-diesel hybrids, plug-in hybrids, or even solar-powered plug-in hybrids - while also helping hydrogen, electric, and fuel cell vehicle development.

Can diesel achieve that in a decade?

The future of the world, especially the automotive world, will not be driven by cheap oil, but by technology and that technological advancement needs to begin now. Sure America can wait, but the longer it waits, the more technologically obsolete America will become.

Besides, isn't it time America invests in America, rather than in filthy rich oil companies? Congress could help end foreign oil dependency, help secure America, and
help put American automakers back into the black. What are they waiting for, noble oil lobbyists?

Flex-fuel-diesel hybrid vehicles or more oil refineries: Which is the better investment

Originally posted on the Hybridcarblog.com

When the Iranian Revolution in 1979 caused massive gas lines in the United States, many Americans turned to small Japanese vehicles. Eventually, however, oil prices stabilized, gas prices dropped, and many Americans returned to gas-guzzling as SUVs became an expression of American freedom.

But the Iranian Revolution wasn't only felt in the U.S., and the problems of oil dependence, particularly foreign-oil dependence, pushed Brazil to do more than just buy a few small Japanese vehicles. By 1985 almost every vehicle produced in Brazil was designed for alcohol as fuel transportation and gasoline stations were updated to handle this new fuel.

So did Brazil kick the oil habit? Not exactly. According to an interesting article, Ethanol: Is it the answer?, a combination of cheap oil and droughts - which caused poor harvests and less ethanol - led Brazilians back to oil.

Today in Brazil, flex-fuel technology has changed everything. Able to run on both gasoline, ethanol, or a mixture of the two, flex fuel vehicles allow Brazilians to take advantage of which ever fuel they choose. Thus, drivers are hedged against either drought, or skyrocketing oil prices.

So should America just focus on flex-fuel vehicles as the solution to America's oil problems?

Absolutely not.

Flex-fuel vehicles definitely are part of the solution, but even Brazil hasn't been able to kick the oil habit. More important Brazil consumes SIGNIFICANTLY less fuel per year than the U.S.. Additionally, Brazil uses sugar to produce its ethanol fuel, the U.S. uses corn, which is far less efficient than sugar.

Of course new grains, etc., might offer better efficiency, but how long will it take to create enough fuel? Brazil produces only about 5 billion gallons of ethanol per year, U.S. demand is around 140 billion gallons per year. And what about drought, or another natural disaster?

The key to Brazil's struggles and successes boil down to one thing, flexibility. Flex-fuel vehicle technology should be the standard in America, but it shouldn't stop there. Hybrid technology, or even better, plug-in hybrid technology, offers even far more flexibility.

Hybrid cars, or better yet, flex-fuel hybrid cars, could significantly improve fuel efficiency, while opening up new fuel possibilities beyond oil. In reality; however, fuel competition alone won't be enough to handle the oil monster, and that's why hybrid technology is so important.

Plug-in flex-fuel advanced diesel hybrid vehicles could offer fuel efficiency of more than 100 mpg with today's technology - even for SUVs. Sure the technology is somewhat expensive today, but it is FAR less expensive than fuel cell technology. Additionally, a national fleet of 100 mpg vehicles would end the need for foreign oil in about 5 years, which I've argued could save America more than a TRILLION dollars (more).

Even better, plug-in power could lead to another revolution in the automotive world, the utilization of solar power. Already solar power is cost-effective to power a home - if you are going to live in that home for at least 15 years - but what if you could also help power your car with your home energy system, with totally clean energy? Even more interesting, garage mechanics have already created plug-in hybrids with solar panels and Mazda is now showing a solar hybrid concept vehicle that includes embedded solar panels in the roof of the vehicle.

Ultimately, the good old days of the U.S. auto industry are over. Constant innovation and the best technology are an absolute requirement, and the best technology requires fuel flexibility, as well as the best possible fuel economy. It isn't just about saving money at the fuel pump, or protecting the environment, it is about protecting the security and welfare of Americans and the American economy.

Neither ethanol, bio-diesel or hybrids alone are going to take the oil monkey off America's back quickly enough, but combined, these alternative choices could radically change America within a decade.

Instead of subsidizing the cost of a foreign-oil-dependency-ending fleet of vehicles, America is going to build more oil refineries, drill in Alaska, and give billions of tax payer dollars to filthy rich oil companies, as GM increases production on the Hummer.

Is that really an investment in the future? Isn't it time to start investing in real American freedom, instead of investing in companies that can profit as much as $23 billion in just one quarter?

I guess it is pretty clear who Congress represents, and it isn't the majority of Americans.

More refineries, or more hybrid cars?

Congress has become a joke, or maybe it has always been joke. Special interests, not the people's interests, are always the priority. And, who can blame Congress? Since half the people don't care and don't want to vote, I guess the power of lobbyists should be expected.

Instead of Congress focusing on more oil refineries and more tax incentives for oil companies, why not bail out the American auto industry and fund hybrid cars?

Bio-diesel hybrids could end foreign oil dependency as fast as they can be made. Additionally, Congress would be helping an important American industry. Moreover, ending foreign oil dependency could save the country more than a trillion dollars according to studies (more).

What are we waiting for? Get registered to vote and make sure that everyone you know is registered to vote. Don't worry about who they are voting for, just make sure they vote.

Plug-in hybrids: Why doesn't Congress act on foreign oil dependency?

Forget fuel cells and the hydrogen economy, plug-in hybrids offer the technology to end foreign-oil dependency now!

There is a great AP article, Experimental Hybrid Cars Get Up to 250 Mpg, which demonstrates the fact that plug-in hybrid vehicles, such as a plug-in Prius could achieve 80 mpg for the daily commute of most drivers. Additionally, more advanced plug-in hybrids have achieved up to 250 mpg.

Not long ago I wrote about flex-fuel hybrids that could achieve 500 mpg.

Why doesn't the government care? Why doesn't GM or Ford care? This isn't just foreign oil dependency, this is America's national security. Are the lobbyists of the auto and energy industries really so powerful that the safety of the American people is less important than their energy monopoly?

For more check out, What's better than a hybrid car? A plug-in hybrid car of course!

India & China vs. America: Where is Congress?

I just came across an interesting article, Indian team to visit China for oil talks which states, "An Indian delegation will head to China next week to explore ways to cooperate in acquiring foreign energy assets to meet the soaring fuel needs of their fast-growing economies.."

No big deal, right? Except, for the fact that India is predicting that its demand for oil will quadruple in the next 20 years. Since India imports 70% of its oil, it will need more and more oil from the same places that America needs oil, which will only lead to higher oil prices.

When are Americans going to wake up? Yes, oil has been cheap, but the costs are going to rise dramatically and threaten the economy, yet technology - that which made America great - provides answers.

Hybrid cars, such as the Toyota Prius hybrid demonstrate the fuel efficiency abilities of hybrid technology. Hybrid SUVs, such as the Toyota Highlander hybrid and the Ford Escape hybrid, demonstrate that the technology can be utilized beyond small vehicles.

Some argue today's hybrids aren't fuel efficient enough. While a valid point, the potential of hybrid technology has barely been tapped.

With India and China cooperating to meet their exponentially growing foreign oil, America must embrace technology that offers solutions today, not in two decades. By then, the damage will already have been done.

The race to end foreign oil dependency is even greater than the race to the moon. JFK, where are you?

Congress, fuel efficiency and hybrid cars

Early last week I wrote that Congress was blowing tax credits for hybrids because of caps. I followed that train of thought with the article The Energy Bill, hybrid critics and American political ineptitude, in which I wrote, "Ultimately, the clean vehicle tax credits and much of the energy bill promotes and endorses complacency, rather than technological innovation."

Then on Friday it was announced that hybrids would qualify for the carpool lane. This set off a fury of resentment at sites like autoblog.com whom didn't think such a move was fuel efficient. I posted an entry to autoblog letting them know fuel efficiency isn't the only reason for carpool lanes.

Ultimately, carpool lanes were created to move traffic because idling traffic causes the most air pollution. It is the fact that hybrid cars are super clean that has given them carpool lane status.

Nonetheless, according to a great article in the Mercury News, the California DMV will only be giving 75,000 total hybrids car pool lane status. So the whole issue is somewhat of a mute point.

All of this goes back to the ineptitude of the American Congress.

To promote fuel efficient technology in this time of oil and terrorism wars, Congress refuses to address fuel efficiency,even though - according to the EPA - the Big 3 are abusing fuel efficiency loopholes that result in 1980's fuel efficiency in 2005 America.

Instead, Congress has provided capped credits for hybrids that are really just protectionist tax credits that reward an industry that is failing America and failing in the war on terror. Ultimately, the clean vehicle tax credits were just pork for the Big 3. One way or another tax payers are paying for the incompetence of the Big 3.

The hybrid tax credit and carpool lane privileges for hybrids are nothing but hype and might hurt, rather than help, the move towards clean, fuel efficient technologies. Ultimately, the energy industry and their cronies in Congress - which represent a majority of members - do not represent America.

I'm really starting to wonder, who is more dangerous, terrorists or the American Congress? Actually, I'm starting to believe the answer to the question is, unfortunately, blatantly obvious.

Vote them ALL out. It couldn't get any worse.

The energy bill, hybrid critics and American political ineptitude

The energy bill isn't a complete waste, but the amount of pork-barrel legislation that becomes part of any legislation is truly astounding.

Anyway, the clean vehicle tax credits were initially meant to reward technological innovations that provide clean energy and reduce foreign oil dependency. The original intention of the clean vehicle tax credits was to reward expensive and advanced technologies, such as hybrid cars and fuel cell vehicles, as an incentive for greater production and development amidst high costs.

Since neither GM nor Chrysler have any hybrid vehicles, they successfully lobbied Congress to add clean diesel vehicles to the tax credit as well.

At first glance this might seem fine. Shouldn't any clean technology be able to utilize the clean vehicle tax credit?

That might be OK if not for the caps on the amount of vehicles that can qualify for the tax credits. Under the clean vehicle tax credit, not everyone who buys a hybrid car, for example, will be able to utilize the tax credit. Additionally, Chrysler and GM can utilize the tax credits to promote diesel, instead of hybrids. In fact, tax credits for diesels offer GM and Chrysler incentives NOT to produce hybrids, since there are only a limited number of credits available.

So what? Diesel can achieve the same fuel efficiency as hybrids at a cheaper cost, some diesel advocates will reply.

Hogwash. The only way a super clean diesel engine will match the efficiency of true hybrid vehicles is by utilizing EPA fuel efficiency testing methodologies.

Well, the Toyota Prius hybrid doesn't achieve EPA fuel efficiency estimates the critics will clamor.



The truth is, very few vehicles achieve EPA fuel efficiency ratings. This isn't a hybrid vehicle issue. In fact, in real world driving it is large trucks, SUVs, and overly-horsepowered cars that miserably fail to achieve their EPA estimates. I'm still waiting for the hybrid-hating editors at AutoWeek to address this one (more on this).

There are number of problems with EPA fuel efficiency estimates, but the biggest is the EPA's assumption that Americans do most of their driving on the highway going 55 mph.

This simply isn't true. Congestion is becoming more and more commonplace in America, and the problem is only going to get worse. Don't believe me? Check out what the Department of Transportation has to say on the matter (click here).

In congested traffic, hybrid vehicles achieve their best fuel efficiency and, in such conditions the Toyota Prius, contrary to its many critics, can achieve the EPA estimated 60 mpg, or even higher. On the contrary, conventional vehicles perform their worst in these conditions, and that is the problem with clean diesel.

In congestion, clean diesel does not perform as well as hybrids. If not only congestion, but increased congestion, is the future for the American driver, then diesels luster truly beings to tarnish.

More important, in terms of congestion, hybrids offer significant untapped potential. Plug-in hybrids and new hybrid batteries will offer the potential for hybrids to become significantly more fuel efficient. A 100 mpg Prius is possible with today's technology. Even a 100 mpg Ford Escape hybrid SUV, or a 100 mpg Toyota Highlander hybrid SUV, isn't that far off if hybrid batteries continue their current gains in efficiency and size and/or if plug-in capabilities are added.

Ultimately, the technology that has made computers faster, more powerful, smaller and more portable is essentially the same technology that is key to hybrid vehicles. Equally important, this same technology will ultimately be key to fuel cell vehicles.

Quite simply, diesel technology will never be the answer to foreign oil dependency, but advanced hybrids can not only end foreign oil dependency, but they could do it almost pollution-free.

While I agree that diesel technology offers important gains in fuel efficiency and can be a good buy today, diesel technology simply doesn't compare to the potential of hybrid technology. With a limited number of tax credits available, and a Congress that refuses to address fuel efficiency - even in the midst of oil wars in Iraq and oil-driven terrorism - technology offers the only hope for change.

Thus, only the most promising technologies should be rewarded with tax credits. Otherwise tax credits for clean vehicles become another loophole for the Big 3 to increase our foreign oil dependency, as a new EPA report - withheld until the passage of the energy bill - is going to show (Read).

Sure GM can continue to assure Congress that cheap fuel cell vehicles are just around the corner, as GM has done for decades. Nonetheless, too many smart people have noted that this simply doesn't seem possible, and how many decades does it take to get around the corner?

How long will Americans continue to tolerate such unAmerican leadership from one of America's most important American companies. Neither consumers, nor citizens, but shareholders, are the only concern to GM.

Ultimately, the clean vehicle tax credits and much of the energy bill promotes and endorses complacency, rather than technological innovation. With such political and corporate ineptitude leading America, is it really any wonder that America continues to fall further and further behind in the technological battlefield?

Congress and corporation, an American disgrace.

FIRE CONGRESS! Let's bounce these pork-barrel loopholers

The NYTimes is reporting that the EPA is not going to release a new report about how automakers are abusing fuel efficiency loopholes, setting America back 20 years in the fight against foreign oil dependency. Thus, Congress can pass another loopholed energy bill that actually provides incentives to companies, such as GM and Chrysler, to avoid developing hybrid cars in favor of diesel. While clean diesel offers some advantages over gasoline, the potential of hybrid vehicles is significantly greater than the potential of diesel. Just another example of how badly Congress sucks. Even in time of foreign-oil wars, and oil-driven terrorism, Congress still rewards auto companies and oil companies for making the problem worse. FIRE CONGRESS!

Congress is blowing hybrid vehicle tax credits

Congress is a joke. The only legislation they can adequately accomplish is pork-barrel legislation. Tax credits for hybrid vehicles are going to be limited to only 60,000 vehicles per manufacturer and it's not just hybrid cars. All 'fuel-efficient' vehicles will qualify, including diesel vehicles - due to the arm twisting of GM and Chrysler. "It's all about having the marketplace, not regulation, driving the move into cleaner cars," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland, sponsor of the car-tax credits. Yeah, right. So, taxpayers have to pick up the tab for the inefficiencies of the Big 3, as well as the terrorism and war costs of foreign oil dependency?

Oil glimpses $60.00, is Congress watching

The trading day started off O.K., but when oil hit $60.00 today, the Dow dropped triple digits. In the next few years, America is going to walk a fine line. If a hurricane knocks out Gulf of Mexico production, gasoline prices could spike significantly, especially if it appears this winter will be cold. Then there is always the specter of terrorism.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that either the government, nor American business, will offer any solutions for Americans.

So what can you do? Hybrid cars are one of the greatest free market choices consumers can make. The purchase tells automakers that consumers want clean, efficient automotive technology.

While I think the Toyota Prius and Honda Civic hybrid are the best overall choices, there are more choices than ever. The Ford Escape hybrid and Toyota Highlander hybrid can fulfill your SUV needs, while the Lexus RX400h while fit the luxury-motivated consumer, and if you need a highway vehicle, the Honda Accord hybrid is a nice choice.

Things will get worse before they get better in the world of oil - if they ever get better. Since the government doesn't appear capable of intelligent legislation, it's going to be up you, the consumer.

You can make a difference.

What happens when gas hits $3.00 per gallon?

So oil is almost at $60.00 per barrel and has a very good chance of approaching $70.00. While I've predicted $3.00 gasoline before year's end, which was an aggressive prediction just weeks ago, others are sounding the $3.00 dollar alarm as well now. "I think within a year from now, you're probably looking at $3 gasoline and you're probably looking at something over $60 for oil," stated oil tycoon Boone Pickens, who runs a billion-dollar hedge fund that invests in energy commodities and equities.

What will happen if gas hits $3.00? Not much good from Congress or U.S. automakers - that seems clear. And why should they act, most Americans are complacent, apathetic and don't vote anyway.

What could they have done?

Biofuels are competitive when oil is $35 per barrel in Brazil (See more). Why couldn't that have happened in America? I'm sure pork-barrel lobbyists had nothing to do with it.

For more see Gas prices, hybrids, and Politics.

Brazilian flex fuel vehicles demonstrate U.S. Congressional incompetence!

If there is any doubt as to the incompetence of the American Congress, Brazil's handling of its foreign oil dependency puts the matter to rest. When the '73 oil embargo created gas lines in the U.S., the crisis was even worse in Brazil, which imported 80% of its oil. Today, Brazil is almost free of foreign oil dependency, the U.S. is more dependent than ever. Brazil uses 40% ethanol, the U.S. uses 3%. (More from the LATimes)

Who exactly does Congress represent? I guess recent reports demonstrating that the gap between rich and poor has grown far wider pretty much sums that one up. I say we fire them all!

Medical marijuana and voting

So, the Supreme Court ruled that federal law is more important than state law when it comes to medical marijuana. I guess that isn't really much of a surprise.

Nonetheless, the evidence that marijuana has medical uses is indisputable. The Medical Association, not the DEA, should be responsible for the governance of this medicine. The rights of Americans are being denied.

Doctors already control the use of drugs far more dangerous than marijuana. Why the bias? Prisons, police, pharmaceutical companies, and fat advertising contracts - whole industries demanding more money to increase the race for the proverbial carrot on a stick, a battle that can never be won?

For decades 100s of billions have been wasted trying to prevent 'Reefer Madness' without success as drug use has increased. Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results each time?

Then there is hemp. Hemp For Victory saved America in WWII, but it's too dangerous to help with global warming, pollution, and foreign oil dependency?

Are the only leaders in American politics fascists? If hemp was so important for Washington and Jefferson, why is it so dangerous today?

The Supreme Court made it very clear, this is an issue for Congress and the people. Since Congress only cares about re-election, nothing is going to be accomplished.

So, get registered to vote! Let's wipe the slate clean. Down with all incumbents!

And buy a hybrid car!

23 Billion reasons to buy a hybrid car

Hybrid vehicles can change the world today.

The only question, today, is cost-effectiveness. So, we're supposed to wait until fuel cells, we're told by the American auto establishment?

How cost-effective are fuel cells?

Instead of giving billions to the oil industry with the Energy Bill, perhaps Congress should give it to GM to produce some hybrid vehicle "Freedom Fighter" fleets. Buy this hybrid car, end foreign oil dependency, make America stronger.

Instead we're asking filthy rich oil barons to solve our problems, until fuel cells?

Who does Congress represent? American automakers invested far too much of their future into SUVs because Congress made it profitable for them to do so - at the expense of America's national security.

While I believe in laissez-faire economics, foreign-oil dependency has led to two wars in Iraq, terrorism against the United States, and life-shortening pollution.

I'd say its quite clear that gas-guzzling products have put America's peace and property rights at risk, without question. America's transportation habits have significantly increased America's dependence upon foreign oil, while exposing Americans to significant physical and economic risk.

When Congress gives billions to the oil industry, an industry that saw $23 billion in profits in just the first 3 months of this year, to help, that's 23 billion reasons for me to demand nothing less than hybrid car efficiency now.

More on hybrid cars.

Government's SUV bias

Yesterday, Congressional investigators basically called the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's automobile crash tests, useless, because they do not accurately report the safety risks of SUVs.

SUVs are safe, as long as you are not in a rollover (30% of all fatalities), or in a car that an SUV is crashing into.

So, the government's crash safety tests hide the true dangers of SUVs, the government's EPA fuel economy ratings make SUVs seem 15% more fuel efficient than reality, and Congress refuses to raise fuel efficiency standards as foreign-oil, and oil dependence in general, become the greatest threats to American security.

Somebody's pockets must be getting lined.

Yes, some people need a large vehicle, but SUVs could be much better designed. One person's crash safety shouldn't come at the expense of someone else's life, just for a higher ride, or a false sense of security; especially, when the same hunk of steel causes the most road damage, spits out the most pollution, and guzzles tons of terrorist-supporting, economy-crushing, earth destroying foreign-oil.

Freedom of choice is important, but not more important than the welfare of the people. Hybrid cars such as the Ford Escape hybrid, or Toyota Highlander hybrid, are a step in the right direction for the American SUV niche.

Inefficient technology has many costs, and hybrids are changing the perception of what's possible. The Toyota Prius demonstrates that automobile technology can change the world today.

What are we waiting for?

America's Fight: Why Detroit must embrace hybrids

Detroit's problems are simple, American multi-national corporations.

In America, as soon as a President or Senator is elected, the next election becomes their top priority. America is only focused on right now, or the next 2 to 4 years. Yet, the decisions made today have impact far beyond just the next couple of years, when our decisions become someone else's responsibility.

Moreover, American multi-national corporations are also typically focused on 'right now' politics, as well as 'right now' profit for shareholders. Thus, responsibility is determined only by 'right now' profitability.

This is bigger than Detroit. This is about the essence of America, which is why the Senate - at the President's request - must add tax credits for hybrid cars and other clean energy technologies.

Right now is the time for change, and hybrids vehicles, including diesel-electric, plug-in, and hydrogen-electric vehicles, prove hybrids have barely tapped their potential.

This isn't Detroit's fight and they are not in it alone. Detroit, Congress, and every President since Jimmy Carter, has failed America by not taking up this fight decades ago.

This is America's fight, and many of us are demanding action RIGHT NOW. Join the hybrid revolution.

Hybrid vehicle tax credits still alive, Bush to push

According to CNN, President Bush is going to give another speech to outline some add-ons to the Energy Bill that Congress recently passed. In addition to new oil refineries and nuclear power, Bush will also promote his tax credit proposal for hybrid cars and other clean vehicle technologies. While the House passed on these initiatives, the Senate still has an opportunity to incorporate them into the current legislation, which the President is hoping to sign by August. Hopefully, the Senate will do a better job than the House.

More on hybrid car tax credits.

Gas prices affecting economy

According to Reuters, "U.S. consumer confidence deteriorated in April to its lowest in five months as higher gasoline prices left Americans uncertain about their economic prospects, a report said on Tuesday."

The so-called "backbone of the U.S. economy" is strongly affected by gasoline prices? Who'da thunk it?

Obviously not Congress, or some action might have been taken regarding fuel efficiency decades ago, when evidence of future problems began to mount.

Protecting inefficient, short-sighted, profit-greedy multi-national corporations is not free market capitalism, it's corrupt politics that has risked both the U.S. economy and National Security. Even after 911 - a day that changed everything(?) - nothing has changed.

Join the revolution, demand nothing less than hybrid car fuel efficiency, and don't forget this issue the next time you vote.

Bio-diesel hybrids and why you should fire your Congressperson

The hybrid vehicle powertrain is a beautiful thing because of the plethora of engine combinations with which it is able to integrate.

Currently, most hybrid cars, such as the Toyota Prius, are gas-electric hybrids that utilize both gasoline engines and electric motors. However, the future of hybrids could be dominated by diesel engine and electric motor combinations, or hydrogen engine electric motor combinations - a vehicle that Ford has already conceptualized.

Still, hydrogen doesn't offer a solution today. Diesel hybrids, on the other hand, pose some interesting possibilities today, such as bio-diesel-electric hybrids. These vehicles could utilize new techniques that could turn American crops into clean bio-diesel fuel for American vehicles.

The point is, hybrid powertrains enable the integration of the best innovations in the automotive industry to create vehicles that can have an immediate impact on the environment, economy, and foreign-oil dependency.

The only obstacle is profit. Making America a safer and more socially responsible country just isn't cost-effective for two of America's most important corporations. Or, even worse, making America safer isn't even a concern.

As an American citizen I find this completely unacceptable. While I realize more than a million jobs are at stake, the fact that these companies - and their cronies in Congress - have put the security of 100's of millions at risk with greed-driven corporate incompetence is unforgivable.

Americans do not owe either GM or Ford anything. GM and Ford owe America - not in decades when they can monopolize fuel cell technology for fat shareholder dividends - today.

More important and unfortunate; however, Congress needs to be fired for serving lobbyists rather than citizens.

Gas prices, the Energy Bill, and Congress

Since the Energy Bill passed the House of Representatives, I have scanned the media for a positive assessment of the Energy Bill.

I have been unable to find one.

A majority of Americans, ones that live near the poverty line - the ones you never hear about on the O.C. or on reruns of Beverly Hills 90210 - are coming up shorter and shorter each month because of gas prices. But, who cares about a bunch of hillbilly, disenfranchised Americans that don't vote anyway?

Definitely not Congress. Gas prices are skyrocketing and the blame falls on both Democrats and Republicans alike. The last President to really push fuel efficiency was Jimmy Carter, according to USAToday.

While it seems obvious that Republicans have oil-lined pockets, Democrats are not nearly as innocent as outspoken Nancy Pelosi-(D)California, would have us believe. Instead of blaming Republicans, perhaps she should start by questioning the UAW-controlled-Democrats that are just as complicit in protecting the status quo of the automotive industry.

Even China is raising fuel efficiency standards. Not because scientific evidence suggests a global warming connection, but because pollution is ALREADY affecting their lives and China isn't very interested in America's decades old, inefficient automotive technology.

Save that for the Americans too stupid to value substance over image.

But I don't blame those Americans because we haven't had much choice, thanks to Congress. Experts, including those from the government, tell us this is an issue of National Security, yet neither corporate America, nor Congress, is taking responsible action.

Instead, billions of tax-payer dollars are being given to rich-in-profit energy corporations to 'save' America from the problems the same corporations created.

So, when you are at the pump this summer, pumping $3.00 gallons of gasoline into your vehicle, remember to thank your well-paid Congress-person.

And, if you are interested in buying a new car, don't forget hybrid cars! Send a message to the automotive industry that you want change.

Yahoo! News - Civility Drops to a Low Point in Congress

Yahoo! News - Civility Drops to a Low Point in Congress

Great article on the possible origin of the polarity in Congress. Some Democrats say it started in 1978 with Newt Gingrich, others that it's an abusive Republican Majority. A historical Republican perspective wasn't included. Nontheless, it characterized that state of affairs as "indicative of what has become a poisonous atmosphere in Congress this year."

So, we can be certain a lot is being accomplished and our tax dollars are well at work, on both sides of the aisle.

Nader Again Refuses Dems' Request He Quit

Link to Story Posted on Yahoo

What is up with the Democratic Party? Ralph Nader has every right to run for office, and his supporters have every right to support him. This is the essence of freedom and democracy, this is America. While I realize that Democrats think defeating Bush is everything, even at the cost of choice, it must be remembered that freedom has costs. Freedom means that people of differing viewpoints must respect each others' differing viewpoints. Democrats complain about that the Patriot Act is eroding personal freedoms, yet they still try to take away, minimally, millions of peoples' vote. Voting should be the ultimate freedom, and neither party should ever seek to restrict this choice.

In the news, Democrats continually speak of America, or President Bush losing "moral authority" in Iraq. How about Democrats losing moral authority in America? It is completely unethical, immoral and unacceptable for the Democratic Party to do anything but promote the Democratic Party. Instead of limiting choice, why don't these Congress People get into their communities, at the grassroots level, and help their neighbors, providing the kind of leadership that compels voters to follow great leaders. We live in a country where 50% of the people don't vote. While difficult, mobilizing these new voters, even if only a few million, is a much more democratic expenditure of money and time for the Democratic Party.

Gerrymandering by both parties has created indentured Congress people. Incumbency in the House of Representatives is almost 100%. The polarity of the two parties is terribly high and the people are tired, of BOTH parties. While Democrats might be right that it is time for Bush to go, it's time for these Democrats to go as well. Neither party represents the Majority of Americans and neither party has the right to take anyone's vote away. The Democrats involved in this scandal must stop now, and they must apologize to the American people.