Freedom
Gas at $4 a Gallon? Here’s Why
When gas prices edged up fifty cents a gallon during the George Bush years, the mainstream media cried bloody murder trying to smear the Administration.
Yet under the Obama administration, gas prices have DOUBLED–with hardly a peep from those same news outlets.
Why?
Because it was never about prices. It was about bringing down a conservative president then, and propping up a liberal (socialist) one now.
The leftist media actually want gas prices to rise because they desire to take Americans out of their cars and into centrally-planned light rail systems the people don’t want to use. They want to promote wind, solar, and other renewable resources to “save the planet.”
It’s a huge “con” which is about nothing but control.
Controlling people. Limiting freedom.
America has plenty of energy resources to power everything we use–at far lower prices:
- We have vast oil reserves, including ANWAR, which if it had been developed ten years ago, would be making a significant contribution to lower fuel prices now.
- We have immense shale oil deposits that could be harvested.
- We possess the world’s greatest largest reserves of natural gas.
But there’s been a conspiracy in the past twenty years in this nation to place so-called environmental concerns over the future of powering America. Most of those”concerns” are just plain bunk.
It’s time we called the charade and demanded that American energy companies be allowed to do what’s necessary to bring down gasoline prices and provide complete energy independence from a chaotic Middle East.
The following article by the Heritage Foundation is right on the beam. Read it and let your voice by heard. RB.
“Obama’s Anti-Drilling Agenda Costs Jobs Across America”
President Obama’s hometown of Chicago is nearly 1,000 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. But like many other communities across the country, it is suffering the consequences of his Administration’s anti-drilling agenda.
Illinois accounted for $376.2 million in shallow-water drilling expenditures over the past three years, according to an analysis by 14 oil and gas companies that spend money on vendors and subcontractors. The bulk of that money—$242.2 million—was spent in the Chicago district represented by Representative Danny Davis (D–IL).
It’s fresh evidence that Obama’s anti-drilling agenda is having a ripple effect across America since last year’s oil spill, claiming jobs not just in Louisiana and Texas but also in communities far removed from the shipyards in the Gulf of Mexico.
The study from the Shallow Water Energy Security Coalition paints a picture of the nationwide economic ramifications. Obama can’t even be blamed for playing politics. Five of the states that benefit most from shallow-water drilling backed him as a candidate in 2008. And Democrats represent many of the congressional districts that stand to lose millions.
The cost in jobs is startling. A new analysis by Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason projects national job losses at 19,000 from the drilling moratorium, with wage losses at $1.1 billion. About one-third of those jobs are located outside the Gulf region.
Nearly a year after imposing his anti-drilling agenda, it’s quite clear that Obama is carrying out misguided policies causing widespread harm.
And job losses aren’t the only consequence. The Obama Administration’s deliberate delay in issuing permits for both deepwater and shallow-water drilling has led to a sharp decline in oil production for the Gulf of Mexico this year. The U.S. Energy Information Administration puts the figure at 240,000 fewer barrels every day.
With gas prices hovering around $3.56 per gallon nationwide, now is not the time to lower production. The only way to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil is to produce more of it here at home.
The recent approval of new drilling permits for the Gulf of Mexico is a welcome and long overdue move by the Administration, but it’s nothing to celebrate. The pace of permitting is far below the historical average, and there’s no indication that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) has any desire to return production to a pre-spill level.
Until that happens, expect more grim news like the unfortunate circumstances facing Seahawk Drilling, which was forced to declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a direct result of the bureaucratic delays at BOEMRE. Seahawk’s president and chief executive Randy Stilley, writing in The Washington Post, painted a dire picture:
The government’s drastic slowdown in the issuance of permits for shallow-water drilling operations—in which companies work in familiar geological formations, typically in less than 500 feet of water, mostly seeking to produce natural gas—has all but crippled the industry. The survivors (for now) like Hercules are staying afloat largely thanks to revenue from operations outside U.S. waters. Put another way, a once-proud industry born in the gulf during the Truman administration can no longer survive on operations in its own back yard.
Unless things change soon, Seahawk Drilling won’t be alone. Businesses located in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, California, and New York—top recipients of shallow-water drilling spending—will all face economic consequences as well.
It’s time for lawmakers to take notice. Representative John Sullivan (R–OK), who represents a district with $87.2 million in shallow-water expenditures over the past three years, recognizes the impact. He told us: “Continuing to keep American sources of energy under lock and key by failing to issue drilling permits only serves to place American jobs at risk, drives up costs at the pump and deepens our dependence on foreign oil.”
Things don’t have to be this way. The House of Representatives must continue to conduct rigorous oversight of the Obama Administration, challenging the Administration’s excuses and applying pressure when necessary. America’s energy future depends on it.
The Meaning of the Madison Protests
If you’re like me, you’ve been watching the protests in Madison, Wisconsin–and indeed throughout the Middle East and the world–with great interest and some fear and trepidation.
On the one hand it’s good to see people standing up for what they believe. On the other hand, the Madison protests in particular seem bullyish and quite deceptive–with teachers closing down the schools with faked sick notes and fourteen Democratic law-makers fleeing the state to shirk their legislative responsibilities.
For the protesters, their main justification seems to be that the end justifies the means.
But that principle only applies to despots, tyrants, or anarchists. It does not apply to Judeo-Christian-based republics, their ethics and manners.
Does that give us a hint of the meaning of Madison?
For those who haven’t been following this story, here’s a little background. The 2010 elections saw a large number of conservative governors, legislators, and representatives rise to leadership promising a return to fiscal sanity. Many of them were elected in states where the previous liberal leadership had run up huge budget deficits through unrestrained growth of government workers and services.
In Wisconsin, enter newly elected Governor Scott Walker who inherited a 3.6 billion dollar deficit from the out-going administration. As in many other states, the people elected him to reverse direction and deal with the budget problem caused by egregious spending.
Governor Walker remarked last week: “I’ve said all along the protesters have every right to be there, but I’m not going to let tens of thousands overload or overshadow the millions of people in Wisconsin, the taxpayers of the state, who want us to do the right thing and balance the budget,”
Walker decided to take his budget axe to the root of the problem: the unsustainable and unfair growth of government employee entitlements. He proposed having government workers:
- Pay twelve percent of their own health insurance costs. That seems reasonable.
- Pay five percent of their pensions. That seems fair too.
- Have some limitations on their collective bargaining agreements. (More on that later.)
The first two points are no-brainers. These are modest changes that are totally necessary. We are in a deep recession. People in the private sphere are struggling to make ends meet, and, in some cases, are making draconian cuts to their businesses and lifestyles to survive.
Shouldn’t government workers be asked to make some sacrifices too?
The average America believes so. That’s why deficit-reducing governors, legislators and representatives were swept into office in record numbers in November.
In fact, the problem is much bigger than just asking government workers to give a little. The truth is that times have changed radically in America over the past fifty years.
It might even be necessary to re-define “white collar” and “blue collar” workers.
For most of America’s history, white collar stood for the private sector professionals and business people who wore nice suits and made more money than farmers, factory workers and people in the trades. The blue collar workers were the lower rung of society who got dirty for a living.
How times have changed. Today, the white collar workers are the government folks (plus some professionals and business people). They wear the nice suits and work for a smorgasbord of agencies like the IRS, FAA, FDA, NSA, and thousands more. And today’s blue collar are the self-employed and small business owners who are being strangled by government regulations, fees, and rising taxes to pay for the salaries and benefits of the new government white collar class.
It’s the new American reality–and it’s a huge economic problem.
According to the generally liberal newspaper–USA Today–this growing discrepancy between the salaries of government white collars and private blue collars is exploding. Here’s their take:
“At a time when workers’ pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees’ average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds. Federal workers have been awarded bigger average pay and benefit increases than private employees for nine years in a row. The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade.”
“Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.”
“The federal compensation advantage has grown from $30,415 in 2000 to $61,998 last year.”
“What the data show:
•Benefits. Federal workers received average benefits worth $41,791 in 2009. Most of this was the government’s contribution to pensions. Employees contributed an additional $10,569.
•Pay. The average federal salary has grown 33% faster than inflation since 2000. USA TODAY reported in March that the federal government pays an average of 20% more than private firms for comparable occupations. The analysis did not consider differences in experience and education.
•Total compensation. Federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.”
USA Today’s number relate to the federal government work force. But the same escalation in state government entitlements–especially pensions–has followed the national curve.
At a basic level, the current battle in Madison boils down to the simple need of shrinking the size of government and its perks. It will soon spill over to many other American states that are also “government-heavy.”
It’s way past due.
Government service has been historically viewed in this nation as “public service”–a sacrifice one makes for less pay and benefits to “serve” his country. This concept comes directly from the Bible in Romans 13 where government is viewed as a “minister of God for good.” A minister is a servant. He’s not the boss, the wealthy owner, but rather the one who sacrifices for the greater good.
For over two hundred years, America kept to this wise political model.
But over the part few decades the power of government unions has changed all that. Instead of seeing government employment as a “service,” it is now viewed as a right that demands more money and higher benefits than those who pay the bills in the private sector.
Let’s talk about unions for a moment. I was a union member for a short time in my life, and I’m certainly not against the concept. The union movement was born during a time in which private business was neglectful of a number of basic human rights. The early unions helped correct that by encouraging and passing some good child labor laws and eventually the five day work week. I’m not sure that is biblical (six days in the Scripture norm), but it was a healthy step.
Unions helped balance the economic ledger in the early days of the Industrial Revolution.
However, today, unions have become a noose around the neck of business trying to compete in a global marketplace. With basic human rights issues settled decades ago, unions have become primarily a potent liberal political force–without the concurrence of members. They have gotten in bed with state and national lawmakers in raiding the government till for health services and pricey pensions that the average taxpayer cannot afford to underwrite.
Truth be told, union power and their demands are financially raping many state governments. Wisconsin and many other states are broke because the private sector has been forced to support out-of-control government growth and its associated costs.
Now to the controversial part. The union members are saying that the Wisconsin protests are not about paying their fair share of health care and pensions. They say it is about collective bargaining rights. But history is clear on this point: Government unions should not have collective bargaining rights. So said Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1940s and every president prior to him. Roosevelt believed government workers were servants of the people, and should never be put in the position where they can paralyze or shut the government down–as they doing in Wisconsin.
Private unions can collectively bargain–not government ones. They are essential to the smooth functioning of a civil society.
If you’re interested in the “facts” about the Wisconsin protests, click here for valuable information.
But there is a bigger meaning to the Wisconsin riots that are destined to hit other cash-strapped states. It is this: A battle is going on for the heart and soul of the American nation. It is a 230 year battle between the forces of liberty and those who look to government controls.
America began in liberty–essentially the first constitutionally-born Christian republic in the history of the world. America’s great experiment in liberty was the result of spiritual revivals, faith in God, morals in society, and godly principles in family life, economics and civil polity.
Over time, the forces of tyranny turned the American nation from a Christian republic to a Christian-based democracy; Then to a secular-based democracy; Following the election of Barack Obama–they were on the verge of changing the American nation into a secular-based social democracy with huge government overreach (programs and entitlements) and a great erosion of freedom.
But the people rose up in 2010. Step one in restoring the American heritage of liberty was the Tea Party movement. Step Two was the landslide November 2010 elections which included the election of Scott Walker as governor of Wisconsin.
We are now entering Step Three in the reformation process–the paring back of bloated governments and its restraints on American competitiveness, greatness and freedom.
Many battles lie ahead in various state capitals. In Washington, D.C., a revitalized House of Representatives is leading the way for federal reforms in the growth of Big Government. It will be a a test of wills, but the cause of liberty is worth fighting.
Step Four will be the 2012 national elections. We need a US president and administration that is committed to scaling back the crippling power of the Entitlement State. We also need a United States Senate that is willing to look at vital tax reform, a balanced budget, and dealing with the federal entitlement monsters of Social Security, Medicare, and Obamacare.
This is the meaning of the Madison protests.
Step Three has begun.
It is a fight for America’s future under God and his principles of freedom.
Will you pray and join the side of liberty?
Sudan Votes for Freedom: Will There Be a Domino Effect?
I’m flying back from Washington, D.C. after a sobering few days in the nation’s capital. We are all still grieving the assassination attempt on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona and those who died in the gruesome attack. In the capital city this past weekend, all flags were at half mask and there were hushed conversations everywhere.
This morning I was walking with two friends to a meeting near the US Capitol Building when police cars with glaring lights blocked all entrances to Capitol Hill. We were told that a suspicious package had been found and they were taking no chances. We bided some time at a nearby Starbucks packed with government workers who couldn’t get to their jobs. Sobriety and concern was in the air.
But then, out of this ominous backdrop, I heard the news: Sudan, the largest and one of the poorest nations in Africa, was voting for freedom—and it appeared that liberty might prevail.
Isn’t that just like God—when everything appears to be black–to pierce the darkness with his light?
And is some new found freedom in Sudan a sign of things to come in other nations as well?
You might want to Google a map of Sudan to get a good visual. As you can see, it’s situated in the Muslim band of nations that occupy much of the Saharan tip of Africa. Sudan is a large nation. It’s a dry nation. It’s an extremely impoverished nation.
But today, in all likelihood it voted for freedom. The votes aren’t fully counted, but the result does not appear in doubt. The suffering people of southern Sudan, many of them believers in Christ, are being given a chance to decide their future—and they are overwhelmingly voting for freedom.
This could be a new day for Africa, other nations, and even some territories and states. But before we look at the future implications, let’s think for a moment about this Sudanese miracle.
Do you remember the name Darfur? Yes, it’s a southern portion of Sudan where hundreds of thousands of primarily Christians have been mercilessly slaughtered for nothing else but their faith over the past ten years. The very name Darfur reeks of carnage, injustice, suffering, and genocide.
Darfur is a part of southern Sudan where nearly two million people have been killed in a gruesome civil war. Most have died since 2005, so this is recent stuff. Four million people have also been displaced and forced to live in primitive encampments.
Why? Because the southern portion of Sudan is that area of the African continent where Muslim control of nations and cultures ended—and Christianity has been exploding for the past three decades.
It is also the region where much of Sudan’s lucrative oil industry lies. For decades, the Muslim north has been raiding and pillaging the defenseless south—taking the oil revenues to Khartoum in the Muslim north and leaving the southern fourth of the country destitute and under-developed (there is less than thirty miles of paved road in southern Sudan).
They’ve also tried to force Muslim society and sharia law on some areas of the south, and when that failed and faith in Christ began to spread north, the militants decided to simply kill all the Christians. Two million died. Four million fled their homes.
That’s the meaning of Darfur and southern Sudan: Darkness, tyranny, violence, bloodshed. I think you know where those tactics originate—in the world of Satanic evil– and in this case, evil that is wrapped in the cloak of religion.
But through much prayer, international pressure, and some miraculous changes of heart, even Sudan’s Muslim leader, Omar Hassan al-Bashir was forced to change his mind and agree to allow the south to vote for independence.
Starting on January 10, an estimated seven million Sudanese began going to the polls. It is an election that will probably last a week. Polling places have limited hours because there is no electricity after dark. Since 85% of the southern Sudanese people are illiterate, ballots simply showed pictorial choices that stood for YES for independence (freedom) and NO for the status quo.
And the Sudanese are voting for freedom. It’s a God-given cry of the human heart. If they prevail, the southern quarter of Sudan will become a new and free nation with a new capital—Juba– where families and children can be safer, and a desperately poor and persecuted people can build a future filled with new-found dreams of hope.
Many thousands of displaced Sudanese who now live in other nations are voting as well and look forward to returning to their homeland. Lee Everisto, a 48-year from Juba who now lives in Cairo, Egypt, said over the sounds of drumming and singing: “It is a historic day, a day that is going to put an end to our tragedy. I’m ready to go back as soon as possible.”
Freedom is a precious thing.
It is the birth-right of all people—made in the image of God.
Some individuals with whom I do not usually agree–former president Jimmy Carter, Senator John Kerry, and actor George Clooney—were all in Sudan for the historic vote and hailed the process. I applaud their efforts and stand with them in this historic milestone.
Maybe there is hope for bipartisan ship when the choice is between liberty and tyranny.
As I was meditating on the expected results of the elections in Sudan—and probable creation of a new and independent nation—my thoughts went back to a “prophetic vision” that is told in the first chapter of my 1989 book Leadership for the 21st Century: Changing Nations Through the Power of Serving. In a futuristic passage covering 1986 to 2025, Lee Grady and I accurately predicted the fall of the Iron Curtain (three years before it happened), and some of the social developments of the 1990s.
We also made this prediction for the 21st century: “By 2015 there was no longer a Third World. The globe was only divided into two areas: The Free World and the Dark World. And freedom was growing in the nations of the earth.”
Lee gets most of the credit for that perspective. He’s was right. Free Nations and Dark Nations.
That is the meaning of today’s events in Sudan. There are really only two forms of government in the world. One form tends to tyranny, and this includes most of the Islamic nations on earth. The other form produces liberty based on the creation of man, human rights, and societies based on biblical principles.
One of these principles is de-centralization of many aspects of life including economics, technology, and civil government. Where the ways of the Living God are practiced, people tend to be freer to communicate, invent, build, create, grow wealth, and govern themselves. The Christian worldview diffuses tyranny and central control and multiplies freedom and autonomy.
Freedom includes the right to vote for your leaders.
Another metaphor is light and darkness. A light-filled society creates the freedom for self-determination and an explosion of blessing—like sunshine to a summer day. A controlled, tyrannical society brings a creeping darkness of domination, lack of democracy, and loss of fundamental human rights. This would be the ultimate result of a one world system.
Yet, God appears to be expanding the longing for liberty in the nations of the world. Communism is dark by nature. The Chinese, North Koreans, Cubans, and others are longing to be free. Socialism has many shades of gray. It is hurting nations in Europe and growing in influence in America. Muslim nations that enforce harsh forms of sharia law may be the darkest of all.
But darkness does not do well when the light is turned on.
It flees.
It ceases to exist.
I believe we stand at the beginning of a new day when many nations—even states in some nations of the world—will take votes for liberty and cast off their chains. I believe we will see a liberated and re-united Korean peninsula; I believe many African nations may rise to fight the fight for freedom in their societies. Freedom marches and votes will also take place in many parts of Asia.
In my U.S. state of Washington, I know some folk who would love to “vote for independence” from King County—the liberal bastion of the Northwest. If they want big government, high taxes, and decreased liberties, let them have it. The rest of Washington can become another state where the biblical principles of freedom are allowed to thrive. Many Californians feel the same way about the north and south of their fair state. And Texas hints that if the federal government forces Obamacare on them as a people, they just may vote for liberty and succeed from the Union.
These are radical steps to take—but we live in radical times. Peoples should not change their governing structures lightly or no compelling reason. However, “When in the course of human events…”
Ah yes. That is the heritage of the American Revolution.
I encourage you to pray for a great expansion of personal, social, and civil liberty in the nations of the world in the 21st century. If I am reading the heart of God right, we just might have a rendezvous with destiny that is drenched in the blood, sweat and tears of an explosion of freedom.
And when we are dead and gone, and the history of the 21st century is written, Remember Sudan in 2011. It may be pointing the way to a light-filled future through the power of prayer and the principles of liberty found in Jesus Christ.