RedState
-
Santorum Sweeps
As of today, Rick Santorum officially has no more delegates than he had yesterday. That said, as CNN is just now this moment calling Colorado for Santorum in a stunning upset, his clean sweep of the states who voted/caucused today is a stunning rebuke to both Romney’s purported march through February and Newt Gingrich’s position as the favored not-Romney candidate.
Santorum’s performance was impressive in each state, vastly outperforming his position in the polls, which had him losing by 9 points in Colorado (he won by 5) and winning by only 9 in Minnesota (he won by 18). It is hard to tell who got clobbered worse – Romney, who fell all the way to third in Minnesota, or Gingrich, who finished well behind the flailing Romney in every state. Newt Gingrich didn’t even bother to give a speech tonight, which was probably a good idea if Romney’s shell-shocked and confused concession was any indication of what we could have expected. Although Santorum didn’t get any official delegates tonight, he certainly has bought himself one heck of a news cycle, and has in one day sucked the oxygen out of virtually every other campaign with the stunning results tonight.
For about the 9th or 10th time during this news cycle, the race has fundamentally changed its structure. For the first time I can recall, we are less than a month away from Super Tuesday and no one has any idea what is going to happen. Right now the question becomes whether Rick Santorum can get himself the money and organization to make this last beyond this week and into expensive contests in the larger states. One thing is for sure – this thing is a long way from over.
-
Pop Quiz On The Constitution
Background Information on Ruth’s comments to Egyptians looking for guidance on writing a new constitution:Justice Ginsburg And The Need To Oppose Radical Judicial Nominees
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Trashes Constitution
Cross-Posted: TobyToons.com (Conservative Political Cartoons)
-
Ron Paul, Constitutional Scholar
People like to say, “Ron Paul’s got a great domestic program, it’s just his foreign policy I don’t like.” Really, people only say that because they don’t take the time to understand what Ron Paul’s domestic program is all about, or at least the more insane details thereof. One particular example of this is Ron Paul’s view on monetary policy.
Paul, who likes to present himself as some sort of Constitutional scholar, has said in his last several concession speeches that “the Constitution still says that only gold and silver can be legal tender!” This absolutely absurd reading of the Constitution is universally rejected by anyone who can read English. Let’s look at Article 1, Section 10, from which Ron Paul draws his support:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
Emphasis mine. However, it is also worth noting that Article 1, Section 10, is conveniently titled “Powers Prohibited of States.” Ron Paul might still have at least a non-farcical point if it were not for the existence of Article 1, Section 8 (helpfully titled “Powers of Congress”):
The Congress shall have Power. . . To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof[.]
Get it? The reason states do not have the power to create their own legal tender (other than gold or silver coin) is because that is a power expressly reserved to the Federal government. Remember that this was one of the central evils of the Articles of Confederation – that every state had its own currency, which hindered trade and created economic chaos – and so the founders reserved to the Federal government the right to establish a single currency for the whole nation. States are absolutely and completely prohibited by these sections of the Constitution from generating their own currency other than literal gold and silver coins.
Therefore, even if you ignore that Article 1, Section 10 is expressly confined to restrict the powers of the States, it would not stand for the proposition that Ron Paul wants it to stand for, which is that the Federal government must constitutionally adhere gold/silver standard. It would instead mean that the Federal government was prohibited from using currency that was not literally gold or silver coin. This conclusion is of course absurd (and ultimately would have no salutary effect on monetary policy whatsoever) which is why no person who hasn’t suggested that the government is using paper money to try to track you has ever suggested it.
I get that some people want someone who is a principled, small government isolationist constitutionalist. Sadly, Ron Paul is not that person – he’s just a nut onto whom people are projecting those qualities.
-
“Let me go on. I’m not yielding my time.”
Renee Ellmers (R-NC), took on Henry Waxman (D-CA) in spectacular fashion today in a joint House-Senate hearing on the payroll tax cut extension.
“What you say is completely and totally incorrect.”
Unfortunately a transcript is not yet available, but Rep. Ellmers takes the whole committee to task on ineffectiveness, useless rhetoric, and grandstanding, in a classic rant. It is especially satisfying to hear someone in Congress call out Democrats on their use of “emergency” rhetoric after failing to take care of any of our economic problems, or even pass a budget, last year. More of this, please.
-
CO/MN/MO Results Coveritlive!
Should be an interesting night. Click the box or join in in the comments!
-
Introducing the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale
Around these parts, we have a word that aptly describes shale formations: ubitquitious. (sic)
Every conventional oil and gas basin must have a hydrocarbon source, and that source is a shale. And since shales are low in permeability, we’re finding that the source rock still contains plenty of hydrocarbons, if you can figure out how to get the stuff out.One of the newly-emerging plays is the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale, which is being explored in a wide arc that cuts across central Louisiana and southern Mississippi.
Although the promise of the Marine Shale has yet to be proved, there is reason for optimism: if you follow that arc to the west, roughly parallel to the Texas coast, you’re smack-dab in the middle of the Eagle Ford trend of south Texas, currently the site of one of the hottest oil drilling plays in the country. The Tusc is equivalent in age to the Eagle Ford, and the newest well just tested almost 800 barrels of oil per day.
Yes, the shales are indeed ubiquitious.
Tuscaloosa shale promising
St. Helena well’s initial production spurs interest
The Encana Weyerhauser well, completed in November, averaged 784 barrels of oil per day and 309,000 cubic feet of natural gas, according to Encana’s filing with the state Department of Natural Resources. …
Around two dozen wells have been drilled or are being drilled in the Tuscaloosa Marine Shale, an oil-rich formation that covers Louisiana’s midsection. Energy companies have leased more than 1 million acres in the formation, but so far the firms aren’t sharing much of their early production figures.
Kirk A. Barrell, president of Amelia Resources, of Texas, said before the formation can be considered economically viable, 10 to 20 wells will have to be completed.
“You need the initial (production) rates for 10 to 20 wells, but you also need to get 12 to 15 months out and see what the decline of that rate is,” Barrell said.
Barrell has a blog called The Tusacaloosa Trend:
Sources indicate that Devon will be adding a 2nd rig to the TMS play soon. Encana, who has been rumored for weeks to be adding rigs, now appears to be slowing down the plan. Several sources indicate that it is for corporate reasons relating to very depressed natural gas prices and not the TMS results. The initial rates on the Weyerhaeuser 73H-1 and their record drilling time and lateral length on the Anderson 17H-1 are very encouraging. Sources indicate that after 5-6 completions, a full operational plan will be implemented.
It is worth noting that RedState’s editor, Erick Erickson, attended high school in Jackson, LA. Jackson is in East Feliciana Parish, right in the heart of the Marine Shale play. Considering that Erick’s younger years were spent in Abu Dhabi, we should not be surprised if eventually oil and gas leasing action heats up in and around Macon, GA.
Cross-posted at stevemaley.com.
Follow @VladimirRS
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=”//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js”;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,”script”,”twitter-wjs”);
- Santorumentum Redux
Today could end up being an embarrassing day for any Republican presidential candidate not named Rick Santorum.
Today, Colorado and Minnesota hold their caucuses, and Missouri holds their weird non-binding primary. Newt failed to qualify for the Missouri ballot, which means Santorum is widely expected to win Missouri today. The only company polling Minnesota right now is PPP, which today released a poll purporting to show Santorum leading by 9 in that state. Additionally, PPP released a poll showing Santorum running a strong second in Colorado. To recap, at the end of the day today:
- Rick Santorum, whose campaign was left for dead after an abysmal finish in Florida, might win 2 of the 3 contests today.
- Mitt Romney, who was supposed to sweep February, could end up only winning one of the three caucuses today, and that by a relatively slim margin.
- Newt Gingrich is facing a day with two third place finishes and a DNQ. His argument that Santorum should step aside grows weaker by the day (incidentally, anyone who says Santorum is a stalking horse for Romney has not been paying attention to the Santorum campaign).
- Ron Paul could finish the day far behind all three of the other candidates in delegates.
Ultimately, although today isn’t getting as much press coverage as recent election days, it could end up reshaping the race yet again. This could signal that the great mass of “Not Romney” voters isn’t ready to assimilate yet, and may have determined to abandon ship on the Gingrich campaign. Time will tell whether this time, Santorumentum will have a shelf life of longer than three days.
- Secretary Sebelius, Meet The Anti-Deficiency Act.
It is “unacceptable that HHS fails to maintain accurate financial records and fails to adhere to federal law designed to protect taxpayer dollars from mismanagement and waste,” Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., wrote in a Monday letter to the department’s secretary, Kathleen Sebelius.
The USG may not appear to have a very tight wrap on how and where it’s dollars (expropriated or borrowed) get dispersed. This is particularly true when the US Senate has gone over 1,000 days without the benefit of an actual budget resolution instead of a legislative gimmick that relieves them of that responsibility.
However, in the street-level reality inhabited by people who actually handle government funds, tight and exacting regulations do exist. One very important one is The Anti-Deficiancy Act which is described below.
The Anti-Deficiency Act prohibits federal employees from
• making or authorizing an expenditure from, or creating or authorizing an obligation under, any appropriation or fund in excess of the amount available in the appropriation or fund unless authorized by law. 31 U.S.C. § 1341(a)(1)(A).
• involving the government in any obligation to pay money before funds have been appropriated for that purpose, unless otherwise allowed by law. 31 U.S.C. § 1341(a)(1)(B).
• accepting voluntary services for the United States, or employing personal services not authorized by law, except in cases of emergency involving the safety of human life or the protection of property. 31 U.S.C. § 1342.
• making obligations or expenditures in excess of an apportionment or reapportionment, or in excess of the amount permitted by agency regulations. 31 U.S.C. § 1517(a).It seems the accounting firm of Ernest and Young has audited the books at HHS. This occurred in response to HHS identifying and declaring several violations of the Anti-Deficiancy Act. The audit turned over several large rocks and found even more things that stunk in the books of the HHS.
At present, HHS reports $500M in discrepancies between what they admit to have spent and what the US Treasury agrees that they were authorized and should have spent. Ernest and Young claims the discrepancy involves an additional $900M that the HHS does not currently adequately account for. Sen. Coburn and Rep. Boustany want to know exactly who in HHS made these regrettable “oversights” and if they were related to the American Affordable Care Act.
The Members of Congress in question apparently don’t believe that not reporting $900M in spending is an acceptable methodology by which healthcare can become more affordable. The rest of us shouldn’t either. But then again, when the US Senate cannot even be bothered with debating and formulating a budget for over 1,000 days, it’s not exactly surprising to see mid-level bureaucrats honoring Federal Budgetary Jurisprudence in the breach.
- The People’s Money
At RedState we have become quite familiar with Scott Rasmussen’s polling on the political class and every day Americans. There is a great disparity between the two. In my book Red State Uprising I relied on Scott Rasmussen’s polling heavily, including this nugget:
A July 23, 2010 Rasmussen survey found “75% of Likely Voters prefer free markets over a government managed economy. Just 14% think a government managed economy is better while 11% are not sure.” But, among those considered the political class, which trascends party lines, “a government managed economy [is preferred] over free markets by a 44% to 37% margin. . . . [A]mong Mainstream voters, 90% prefer the free market. Outside of the Political Class, free markets are preferred across all demographic and partisan lines.”
Now Scott Rasmussen has taken the next step and written a book called The People’s Money. The subtitle is “how voters will balance the budget and eliminate the federal debt.” He goes straight into the great divide between the political class and most Americans.
Turns out all that polling that shows Americans are a rather conservative lot is true. It also turns out that the public is willing to make cuts and is willing to tackle social security and medicare.
The catch is that voters are necessarily in favor of a lot of movement conservative reforms to social security, etc., but are much more closely aligned to the conservative movement than to the left.
It makes a really fascinating read and could be a blueprint to get the serious discussions moving on our nation’s fiscal solvency. I am not nor have I ever been a fan of poll driven political platforms. But seeing where voters are and what they think provides a lot of insight and can help politicians build a workable platform to solve our serious problems.
You can get Scott Rasmussen’s The People’s Money right here. It is a very thought provoking read.
- Hope, Handbags, and Hypocrisy
This morning’s Wall Street Journal reports on Obama’s “Runway to Win” fashion fundraiser tonight, where the campaign will begin hawking campaign-themed apparel and accessories from high-end designers. The article also raises some serious issues about potential campaign finance law violations:
“Jan Baran, an election lawyer with Wiley Rein LLP, said designers can’t ask employees to work on political projects unless they willingly volunteered their time. ‘Someone who is paid to do campaign work is not a volunteer,’ he said. If the designer or staff are paid by anyone other than the campaign, it would be considered a campaign contribution from a company to a candidate.”
These are serious questions and deserve a serious investigation—and an honest answer from the self-proclaimed “most transparent administration in history.”
But visitors to www.RunwaytoWin.com may find themselves asking yet another question: Is the Obama campaign promoting a president or a product?
The high-priced T-shirts ($45), totes ($75), and scarves ($95) are designed by the likes of Vera Wang, Marc Jacobs, and Beyoncé, and feature logos (the Obama ‘O’), slogans (“Greater Together”), and images (of the president himself).
While the products’ prices are high by conventional standards, it all speaks to a certain cheapening of the commander-in-chief. It underscores yet again the Obama campaign’s desire to run on something—anything!—other than the president’s record.
In 2008, Barack Obama had no record, so he ran on empty slogans. In 2012, he has a record, but because that record is so abysmal, the campaign has calculated that they must run a campaign that deliberately avoids mentioning it.
The campaign has new slogans, old logos, and equally vapid platitudes—all meant to distract from high unemployment, rising debt, and the overwhelming sense that America is headed in the wrong direction.
The American people won’t be distracted, but the Obama campaign has managed to distract themselves from reality. Team Obama talks about “fighting” for the middle class and about vague notions of “fairness”—and then they peddle a $95 scarf. In the Obama economy, few can realistically afford to be campaign-chic—even if these are supposed to be discounted prices. (See the RNC’s video, “The Obama 2012 Fashion Show”)
This tone-deafness comes on the same day that Team Obama took hypocrisy to a new level—embracing the very Super PACs that the president once called a “threat to democracy.” It’s just the latest broken promise from Barack Obama and, like the fashion fundraising, directly undermines the administration’s own rhetoric.
Seeing an opportunity for millions of dollars of pro-Obama cash, the campaign decided politics trumped principle and reversed their own position on Super PACs, encouraging donors to support the third party group Priorities USA.
Barack Obama once declared that as a result of Super PACs, “every American might end up suffering.” Now, the Obama campaign has decided that, in the words of a $50 pin designed by Eddie Borgo, Barack Obama and his Super PAC could be “greater together.” Never mind the effect on “every American.”
It really is all about “Priorities.” Obama now prioritizes fundraising over fighting supposed “suffering.” It doesn’t take a fashion designer to see that’s a bad look on him.
- Santorumentum Redux
