Las Vegas Sun

December 18, 2014

Currently: 53° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Letter to the editor:

Obama’s mixed signals on energy

President Barack Obama’s call for more domestic energy development in his State of the Union address is praiseworthy, as is his Interior Department’s recent decision to conduct new oil and gas lease sales in the Central Gulf of Mexico this June. Doing so will boost the economy and, in turn, government revenue without punitive increases in tax rates. During a subsequent visit to a UPS facility in Las Vegas, however, the president then chastised the same companies that will bid for and produce these resources in the Central Gulf for hoarding “excessive profits” and coveting “taxpayer subsidies.”

Strangely, the president’s words fail to mention the administration’s record on behalf of subsidies — especially to “green” energy. He repeatedly touts renewable energy as an investment for the future, yet, he glosses over a stubborn inconsistency: After spending billions of taxpayer dollars for this purpose, Americans are still waiting for those tens of thousands of jobs that were supposed to have been “created or saved.”

Although “equality” was the pervading theme of this year’s State of the Union address, it seems to escape this administration that the current tax code, with its complex web of loopholes and punitive rates, is what unfairly punishes the whole economy.

The author is the executive vice president of the National Taxpayers Union.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 16 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. The term "crony capitalism" is being bandied about more and more. At the same time we see some of our elected representatives bending over backwards to get favorable tax deals for foreign entities to become involved in our "green" energy projects.

    What is wrong with this picture?

  2. Inconsistancy is the order of the day for this progressive ideologue President. Obama's predisposition is to confer political favor using taxpayer money to reward the hands that feed him.Solyndra is only one example. The Canadian-American pipeline another.This obvious corruption has been in plain view for everyone to see--including his leftist supporters who have been so earnest in their condemnation of Republicans. Obama's presidency is built on a house of cards which will ultimately collapse on this administration.

  3. No matter what any R or D says when running for office or while in office, 'crony capitalism', taxpayer subsidies, tax loopholes will continue as long as our elections are funded by contributions by big business, big labor and other interest groups that then employ lobbyists to advantage themselves.

    This is so obvious that it amazes me that more Americans can't see it. The only thing that ever changes, depending on the party in power and current circumstances is 'who' benefits from the 'crony capitalism', taxpayer subsidies, and tax loopholes.

    Michael

  4. Dennis,

    Is your middle name 'one sided'? Have you forgotten or just choose to ignore what both Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama said about each other during the 2008 nomination process? Can you at least 'try' for a little balance?

    Michael

  5. The National Taxpayers Union? Have any of you conservatives thought to check how much integrity they have?
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...
    They are a propaganda outfit.

  6. "Oh, by the way, Obama carried Catholics in 2008 - that, Dipwad, would be a "fact" - I think he has just put that in major jeopardy with imposing this ideological dictum and forcing Catholics to go against the teachings of their Church"

    Just another example of the GOP criticizing Obama for something Romney did YEARS AGO!

    In December 2005, Romney required all Massachusetts hospitals, including Catholic ones, provide emergency contraception, aka the morning-after pill, to rape victims, even though some Catholics view the morning-after pill as a form of abortion. That would be a "fact."

    Hypocrites.

  7. "[Romney] said he was acting on his legal counsel's interpretation of a new state law - one passed by lawmakers despite his veto - but he also said that "in his heart of hearts,'' he believed that rape victims should have access to emergency contraception."

    Uh-oh, Joe! He believed... in his heart of hearts(!) in violating the rights of Catholics!

    What does the executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts say about this?

    "The initial injury to Catholic religious freedom came not from the Obama administration but from the Romney administration. President Obama's plan certainly constitutes an assault on the constitutional rights of Catholics, but I'm not sure Governor Romney is in a position to assert that, given his own very mixed record on this."

    Even the executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts knows that Romney and Joe are just being HYPOCRITES.

  8. Are you telling me that the GOP is lying to us, Joe?

    Why won't you answer the charge of Romney believing, in his "heart of hearts" that the morning-after pill should be available.

    Isn't the morning after pill considered an abortion by most conservatives?

    And this charge isn't coming from the left... it's coming from the RIGHT:

    "But GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, a Catholic, has accused Romney of trampling on "religious liberty'' at Catholic hospitals, apparently for his 2005 decision as governor."

    "You want a war on the Catholic Church by Obama?'' Gingrich said at a rally earlier this week in Tampa. "Guess what: Romney refused to allow Catholic hospitals to have conscience in their dealing with certain circumstances."

    The GOP is eating itself alive with the hypocrisy.

  9. "Romney didn't call Obama out on this affront - I DID. And Romney did not PURPOSEFULLY place the mandate for the inclusion of contraception in his bill - Obama DID make this conscious effort."

    WRONG. Romney criticized Obama for it earlier this week, making him a HYPOCRITE. Secondly, why didn't Romney submit a bill to the Mass. legislature asking them to overturn the law? Guess he's not much of a supporter of the right to life as you would have us believe!

    Romney's a RINO, and you're a sell-out for supporting him.

  10. THIRDLY, when you said Mitt's hand was forced by the CONSTITUTION?

    LIE!!!!!!!!!!!

    "Romney had angered reproductive rights advocates in July 2005 when he vetoed a bill to make the morning-after pill available over the counter at Massachusetts pharmacies and to require hospitals to make it available to rape victims, even though he had supported emergency contraception during his 2002 campaign for governor. He justified his veto in a Globe op-ed article in which he clearly accepted the view of some opponents of emergency contraception that it can be a form of abortion. Nonetheless, the Legislature overrode his veto."

    "In December of that year, days before the law was to go into effect, Romney's public health commissioner determined that a preexisting STATUTE saying private hospitals could not be forced to provide abortions or contraception gave Catholic and other privately run hospitals the right to opt out of the new law on religious or moral grounds."

    "That ruling sparked widespread criticism, including some by Romney's lieutenant governor, Kerry Healey. Days later the Romney administration reversed course. His legal counsel concluded the new law did not provide any religious exemptions."

    Let's go back to that word in all caps: STATUTE. He could've just worked with the legislature to add a conscience clause to the existing statute. He didn't.

    He caved in, and forced Catholic hospitals to offer the morning-after pill!

  11. Back and forth you guys go! What a waste of time. Mitt Romney has changed positions. Wow! What a revelation. Name a politician who 'hasn't' changed positions?

    The requirement for being successful as a politician are taking positions that enough people like to get you elected. If changing positions is a disqualifier, politicians would be extinct.

    If you want to talk lies, just compare what 'any' politician promises to do once in office and what he or she really does. They all lie.

    Bush: I don't believe in nation building and won't nation build. Oooops!

    Obama: I believe in card check and will see to it that it is enacted. Oooops! I will shut down Guantanamo. Oooops! I am against foreign renditions. Oooops.

    Guys... pounding the other side because they changed positions or did not do what they promised is like placing yourself in a circular firing squad and yelling 'fire'.

    Michael

  12. Dennis,

    This gets so old. I read Coolican all the time. I was at the rally where he quotes Romney. As all our media always does now, he 'spins' what Romney said to place it in the worst possible light. The same thing happens to what President Obama says... it gets spun.. negatively by opponents in the media and positively by supporters in the media.

    Remember 'I like to be able to fire people' portrayed as a 'mean' comment when what he said was that he liked to be able to fire insurance companies when they didn't act properly.

    It's stupid Dennis. We've mixed up reporting and commentary.

    I'd be the last person to say that R's don't deserve criticism and Coolican dishes out some, but his viewpoint is biased to the left. That doesn't make it irrelevant but it does make me view it for what it is. Opinion.

    Michael

  13. Bite,

    I don't believe the President doesn't care about what happens to the country. I do believe he is overmatched by the challenges. The challenges may also overwhelm the R contenders but we need to try someone new.

    Michael

  14. Joe, you may be a "Conservative" but you are Radical, not conservative.

  15. Yes the author of this letter is just a mouthpiece of right wing propaganda. And we of course still need oil for energy. The problem with oil is it is a finite resource so it makes sense to get the ball rolling on developing a clean renewable energy source our future prosperity depends on it. Will it be easy? No. Will there be setbacks? Yes. In the meantime we still need oil. Here's hoping Obama doesn't get his hand bit again with another B.P. preventable oil spill considering he is the president who opened up the gulf for more oil exploration.

  16. "You see, Kevy, you AGAIN make the mistake that if a position is taken by one it must be taken by all."

    Of course, that's not what I wrote.

    YOU brought up the entire issue first, when you wrote:

    "Oh, by the way, Obama carried Catholics in 2008 - that, Dipwad, would be a "fact" - I think he has just put that in major jeopardy with imposing this ideological dictum and forcing Catholics to go against the teachings of their Church"

    When I answered that argument by showing Romney's a hypocrite for echoing this argument, since he, as Governor of Massachusetts, forced Catholic hospitals to offer abortifacients, something that is "against the teachings of their church."

    And yes, you're a hypocrite, because YOU MADE THE ARGUMENT while supporting Romney!

    Then you lied about this being tied to the Constitution, when it is not. Different issue, Joe. The Supreme Court said that Massachusetts had to offer abortion services under Romneycare. This was a completely different issue that was handled by the Massachusetts legislature, meaning Romney could've worked with the legislature to amend the law to allow Catholic and other hospitals to have conscience objections. HE DID NOT.

    If you're going to bring the argument, be prepared for the response.