The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

The Gang of 10 now rolls 16 deep. Six more Senators, three Democrats and three Republicans, joined the original gang of ten Senators seeking to expand offshore drilling, albeit the production expansion would be limited and taxes would be raised over $80 billion to promote renewable sources of energy. Repealing tax breaks for oil companies would be a part of the strategy to raise this money.

President Bush did his part by repealing presidential restrictions on offshore drilling, an executive moratorium that was in place for nearly twenty years. And although a bi-partisan effort to get the Congressional ball rolling in the right direction should be applauded, it would be better if nothing was done at all. The majority of the plan focuses on the same tried and failed tax hikes, tax incentive gimmicks, and subsidies from the 1970s that led us to be in this position in the first place.

Currently, the only thing that stands between us and 19 billion barrels of oil and 83.9 trillion cubic feet of that non-fossil-fuel natural gas stuff is time. On October 1st, the Congressional ban on offshore drilling is set to expire; many are calling this American Energy Freedom Day. Lifting the ban wasn’t a priority eight years ago when you could go the gas station and fill up your Hummer for twenty beans. Heritage policy expert Ben Lieberman writes that there’s great potential with little risk:

“Improved technologies have allowed this oil to be extracted with minimal risk of spills. Indeed, natural seepage from the sea floor is a much larger source of oil in American waters than is offshore drilling. Even safer technologies would be used in any future production.”

High gas prices have shifted the public’s opinion on offshore drilling. According to a Wall Street Journal/ NBC News Poll the public support for offshore drilling is now at 63%. Even California is coming around on drilling. That’s right, California. The Board of Supervisors in California’s Santa Barbara County, the beacon of opposition to offshore drilling due in large part to one of the country’s largest oil spills, voted to support new coastal oil exploration and extraction. In fact, there’s actual scientific evidence that drilling can help the environment because it will significantly reduce the leaks from oil seeps. The letter of support that will be sent to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to consider a change in policy had this to say:

“Since the traumatic oil spill in 1969, significant technological improvements on methods of extraction have been made which should appreciably mitigate such spills from happening in the future.”

A change in policy for offshore drilling would certainly be welcomed, but not at the expense of the American taxpayer. A compromise can only go so far and limited expansion to offshore drilling paired with more subsidies and tax credits for unsuccessful sources of energy isn’t the right way to go. If this is the only policy on the table, it would be more prudent for Congress to allow these anti-energy restrictions expire and have the Department of Interior commence leasing these areas to the energy companies. With the Gang of 16 proposal, for every one step we take forward, we’re taking two steps back. The countdown is on.

• The Green Bait-and-Switch - Adam Smith Institute

In the US many environmentalists are getting infected with the NIMBY-virus* as they realize the unpleasant consequences of renewable energy. New projects, such as the 240-mile transmission line through Indiana to accommodate wind farms (at a cost of $1bn), are unlikely…

• Does Government Need to Fund Energy R&D? - OpenMarket.org

The Breakthrough Institute, whose willingness to think outside the box I greatly admire, issues a challenge of sorts to my friend Jim Manzi, who has been particpating in a debate with them over at Cato Unbound. They say…

• Local Vermont News, Weather and Sports-Penny Protest Under Way at N.H. Tolls - WCAX.com

MERRIMACK, N.H. (AP) - Some drivers are paying in pennies at toll booths in Merrimack, but officials say there have been no traffic backups yet…

• Black Is the New Green - NEI Nuclear Notes

We don’t read USA Today as much as we might - too colorful, ink doesn’t adhere to our hands - but a story on coal and Peabody Energy was full of interesting content and can be found on the web here. This popped out at us…

• Bad Labor Law Is a Path to Economic Ruin - WSJ.com

I recently said that America “would become France” if a certain bill now in Congress — which would virtually guarantee that every company becomes unionized…

DENVER - The left’s relationship with domestic fossil fuel production is growing curiosor and curiousor. Despite Sen. Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) prime time billing, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer gave the best received speech last night. It was supposedly on renewable energy, but Schweitzer also said: “we have cut more taxes for more Montanans than any time in history, increased energy production at the fastest rate in the history of Montana.”

And where did that ‘fastest rate’ of ‘increased energy production’ come from? Wind accounts for less than 1% of our nation’s energy, and environmentalists won’t let anyone build any new dams, so all of Montana’s new energy must be coming from fossil fuels. Indeed, according to the Energy Information Administration Montana’s “geologic basins hold more than one-fourth of the Nation’s estimated recoverable coal reserves. Montana’s eastern basins also hold large deposits of oil and gas. … Montana accounts for about 4 percent of total U.S. coal production and delivers coal to markets in more than 15 States.”

Schweitzer tried to emphasize alternative sources but he didn’t shy away from admitting his state’s fossil fuel focus: “In Montana, we’re investing in wind farms and we’re drilling in the Bakken formation, one of the most promising oil fields in America.” And the Democrats in the hall cheered wildly. Seems the left wants us to Drill Here. Drill Now. Pay Less.

DENVER - OK … he bought everybody in The Big Tent lunch today. Pickens sponsored a meal for all the bloggers here catered by Wahoo’s Fish Tacos (I had a steak burrito). Later Pickens took to the main stage where he was joined by Sierra Club president Carl Pope and Center for American Progress president John Podesta. Pope and Podesta enthusiastically endorsed the Pickens plan. Coupled with Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s personal investment and rhetorical support for Pickens, it is becoming clear that the left is adopting the Pickens energy platform as their own.

Pickens took the time to explain his plan, and he did not skip over the part where he advocates developing our own natural gas resources to power our transportation industry. Pope spoke next and he sounded just like Nancy Pelosi did this Sunday, explaining he supported the Pickens plan since we needed to “move away from fossil fuels and to alternatives.” The reality that natural gas is a fossil fuel that must be drilled before it magically appears in trucks, seemed to totally escape Pope.

Podesta then asked for Pickens’ thoughts on the conservative “drill here, drill now” campaign. Pickens said that he did not believe the Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that show there are 18.7 billion barrels currently off limits in the Outer Continental Shelf and another 10.3 billion barrels in ANWR. Pickens claimed there was, at best, 5% of the oil the EIA says there is in those banned areas. He didn’t explain how he knew this. Nor did he say if he thought the EIA was also wrong about the 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas they say is also in banned areas of the OCS.

DENVER - Turns out we are not the only conservatives here in The Big Tent. Stalwart pro-life blogger Jill Stanek is also blogging among the left this week and she snapped this great photo on Tuesday. The back of the girl’s form fitting t-shirt asks you to support the National Association to Repeal Abortion Laws (NARAL).

DENVER - It’s not just Nancy. This Sunday on Meet the Press Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended her personal investment in T. Boone Pickens energy plan telling Tom Brokaw: “I’m, I’m, I’m investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.” The Pickens plan is very popular among progressives here at The Big Tent. On the main stage now is a panel titled “Faces from the Front: Western Perspectives on the Drilling Boom” and all the speakers are big fans of the Pickens plan. The part the left loves about the plan is Pickens call for enough wind turbines to produce 20% of America’s electricity.

But this isn’t the only part of Pickens plan. Once wind is contributing 20% of U.S. electricity, Pickens wants to take natural gas power plants off the grid and use natural gas, instead of oil, to power American cars. Pickens writes:

Natural gas is our country’s second largest energy resource and a vital component of our energy supply. 98% of the natural gas used in the United States is from North America. But 70% of our oil is purchased from foreign nations.
…
Domestic natural gas reserves are twice that of petroleum. And new discoveries of natural gas and ongoing development of renewable biogas are continually adding to existing reserves.

Here is where the left completely departs from reality. While the panel supported the Pickens plan, they whole reason they were on stage was to criticize “this administration’s ‘drill everywhere’ policies.” Problem is natural gas is not an “alternative to fossil fuels.” As this Energy Information Administration Kids Page explains, natural gas has to be drilled from the ground just like oil.

If the left is serious about transitioning our domestic auto fleet to natural gas, they are going to need to get that natural gas from somewhere. In other words, they are going to need a ‘drill everywhere’ policy.

DENVER — Tonight former President Bill Clinton is supposed to deliver a speech on the official Democratic National Convention theme, “Securing America’s Future.” It is still unclear whether Clinton will stick to his assigned topic, or if he will go off message and defend his presidential legacy. Part of that legacy is the beginning of the online left, specifically MoveOn.org, which was created in 1998 to help defend Clinton from impeachment.

MoveOn has since expanded its policy portfolio far beyond sexual harassment lawsuits, and its claimed 3.2 million members are now a major force in the party. They have been very active against the surge in Iraq, notoriously buying a full-page ad in the New York Times labeling Gen. David Petraeus, architect of our recent success, “General Betray Us.”

But now that Iraq is becoming more and more peaceful every day, some of MoveOn’s members are shifting their focus to Afghanistan. Yesterday in The Big Tent, MoveOn executive director Eli Pariser said his membership was divided over what position to take on the direction of the war in Afghanistan. He said some still believe that the United States “can’t let the Taliban win” but he said growing numbers of his members believe “escalation is the wrong direction.”

This position is at least consistent for MoveOn. After all, if a surge of troops is bad for Iraq, it has to be bad for Afghanistan, too. But progressives are also beginning to question if we should be in Afghanistan at all. Pariser explained that MoveOn’s members first opposed deposing Saddam Hussein because they believed it was “impossible to occupy Iraq without causing civil chaos.” But Afghanistan is just as hostile to foreign troops as Iraq. If the left believes force would never work in Iraq, why would it ever work in Afghanistan?

After Barack Obama announced he wanted to send 10,000 more troops to Afghanistan, influential lefty blogger Juan Cole wrote:

I don’t know whether Senator Obama really wants to try to militarily occupy Afghanistan even more than is now being attempted. I wish he would talk to some old Russian officers who were there in the 1980s first. … If the Afghanistan gambit is sincere, I don’t think it is good geostrategy. Afghanistan is far more unwinnable even than Iraq. If playing it up is politics, then it is dangerous politics. Presidents can become captive of their own record and end up having to commit to things because they made strong representations about them to the public. …

Afghan tribes are fractious. They feud. Their territory is vast and rugged, and they know it like the back of their hands. Afghans are Jeffersonians in the sense that they want a light touch from the central government, and heavy handedness drives them into rebellion. Stand up Karzai’s army and air force and give him some billions to bribe the tribal chiefs, and let him apply carrot and stick himself. We need to get out of there.

By the end of tonight we will know if Bill Clinton was able to stay on message and only talk about foreign policy. But what the left does next on national security is a completely different story. Progressives never like to talk about Clinton’s use of force around the world. Instead, they only talk about all the evil President Bush has done. If Obama becomes president, however, we just may see a MoveOn campaign pressuring him to get out of Afghanistan.

Quick Hits:

• A symbol of the environmental movement, the Santa Barbara County board of supervisors voted to end its opposition to offshore oil drilling yesterday.
• The carbon emissions of China’s electric power sector will jump by about a third this year and surpass the total emissions of the U.S. electric power industry for the first time.
• A U.S. military ship carrying humanitarian aid docked at the Georgian Black Sea port of Batumi on Wednesday, avoiding the port of Poti, which is still controlled by Russian forces.
• A longtime ally of trial lawyers, Sen. Joe Biden worked to defeat a bipartisan bill designed to curb asbestos lawsuits at a time his son’s law firm was filing them and a former aide was lobbying against the measure.
• Sen. Barack Obama sought more than $3.4 million in congressional earmarks for clients of Biden’s lobbyist son.

DENVER — Ever wonder what promotional materials a non-profit group dedicated to a “sustainable” society might give away at a major convention? Well, take a peak at the official promotional bag (above) for Progress Now’s Big Tent and wonder no more.

The lefty magazines, I understand, but that it is a lot of plastic to be giving away for a “sustainable” world. Also, I couldn’t give that Bluetooth ear piece away fast enough. My favorite item was that book there in the middle:

It’s too bad things didn’t work out between Laurie and Larry David, but if fighting global warming means hanging out with lovely ladies like those on that cover, then sign me up!

• How Transparent is Your Local Government Website? - Government Bytes

Sunshine Review is working on the My Government Website Project for “people from all around the country to collaboratively determine the extent to which government-managed websites contain the information people need.”

• Minnesota’s Declaration of Energy Independence - Townhall

I wish I could have posted about this earlier, but on Saturday, the Minnesota Republican Caucus unveiled their Declaration of Energy Independence at the Minnesota State Fair.

• Card Check: Making the U.S. More Like France, Ossified - ShopFloor

Big-picture commentary by Bernie Marcus, founder and first CEO of Home Depot, in today’s Wall Street Journal, “Bad Labor Law Is a Path to Economic Ruin.” And it’s a wake-up call to employers

• Coburn to AWOL Government Workers: Get Back to Work! - RedState

As if we needed yet another report to tell us that the red-tape laden government bureaucracy was inefficient (shocker…I know), Dr. Coburn’s office has just released a new report with some startling facts.

• Joe Biden’s Record on Economic Issues - The Club For Growth  

With Barack Obama’s announcement of Joe Biden as his vice-presidential pick, taxpayers should ask themselves: Just how bad is Senator Biden’s record on economic issues? Unfortunately, the answer is: Very bad.

DENVER — We always knew the left loved big government central planning of the economy, but we never knew how much they loved it. Also on Bob Kuttner’s “Take Back America: The Economy” panel here in The Big Tent were United Steelworkers President Leo Gerard and Green for All founder Majora Carter. In addition to Kuttner’s “Apollo scale” investment in alternative energy, Gerard called for a “Marshall plan” for green collar jobs and Carter called for a “Green New Deal.”

The idea that markets can privately order themselves is completely foreign to the left. They honestly believe that massive carbon taxes and energy mandates will create more jobs. The lie at the core of the green-collar myth is that new jobs are being created. There is no new employment, just a transfer of employment from the “non-green” sector to the “green sector” — and often at a net loss of jobs. If regulations force power companies to forgo natural gas for solar power, then sure, the people who manufacture and install the solar panels will have “new” jobs, but those who mined and distributed the natural gas will be out of jobs. And then there are the higher energy costs. Carbon taxes and renewable energy mandates do not create new energy: they simply drive up the price of existing supplies. And higher energy prices means less jobs for everyone.

While the Massachusetts health reform has generated a significant amount of attention, few have focused on the critical Medicaid demonstration “waiver,” which enabled the reform and was set to expire on June 30.

Absent an agreement on the terms and conditions of the waiver’s renewal, last Friday the feds granted the state its fifth two-week extension in order to continue negotiations.

While the feds and the state aren’t willing to make public the details of their ongoing talks, the local media have reported that the Bush administration is standing firm and refusing to give in to the state’s request for billions of additional dollars from federal taxpayers. The administration deserves credit for holding the line. Until Massachusetts can demonstrate that there has been an appropriate shift in funds away from institutions to individuals, there should be no room for agreement.

To be clear: No one wants to stand in the way of an innovative health reform experiment in Massachusetts. But Massachusetts officials themselves are undermining a key element of their plan’s financing by shoveling dollars that should go to offset the cost of insurance into the coffers of politically favored hospitals.

Granting additional time to negotiate the waiver renewal is one thing, but if, as some have reported, the state might be putting off serious talks in hopes of receiving a “better deal” in the next administration, then federal officials should remain firm and give the state an ultimatum. Federal officials need to ensure that waivers are not a state entitlement, but rather a useful policy tool to effect innovative reform.

DENVER — American Prospect editor Robert Kuttner doesn’t just foresee huge new deficits in Barack Obama’s administration. He is cheering for them.

At an afternoon panel in the Big Tent titled, “Take Back America: The Economy,” Kuttner said, “We need deficits.” Kuttner explained that they are necessary when “an economy is about to go off a cliff.”

So where does Kuttner want Obama to funnel his massive new deficit spending? He wants “Apollo scale” investment in alternative energy (no word from Nancy Pelosi if this includes natural gas) and “public investments” to stop the spiraling fall of housing prices (in other words more leftist crony capitalism).

It’s a good thing the unusually throaty, (AP says it’s Clint Eastwood meets grizzly bear) Christian Bale only had to deal with The Joker in The Dark Knight and not wind turbines. A new study released findings that wind turbines are responsible for causing the lungs of bats to explode; of the 188 dead bats, “they found that 90% of the bats had signs of internal hemorrhaging, but only half showed any signs of direct contact with the windmill blades.”

While this is surprising and a bit disturbing, it is nothing new. A 2007 report by the US National Research Council (NRC) found that wind turbines could have a significant impact on the population of two different species of bats. In a separate report, NRC reported that between 20,000 and 37,000 deaths of birds could be attributed to wind turbines.

Wind has other unintended consequences as well. Dr. Nina Pierpont refers to another downside of wind power as wind turbine syndrome. She claims,

[L]ow-frequency noise and vibration generated by wind machines can have an effect on the inner ear, triggering headaches; difficulty sleeping; tinnitus, or ringing in the ears; learning and mood disorders; panic attacks; irritability; disruption of equilibrium, concentration and memory; and childhood behavior problems.”

It gets worse – they’re often not very reliable. A Wall Street Journal article yesterday said that the turbines made by Suzlon Energy Ltd., the world’s fifth-largest wind- turbine maker by sales, cannot handle the wind and are cracking. This is not a new phenomenon. As this study shows, wind power reliability is a top concern for industry. And in Northern Ireland, a blade from a turbine fell off and cut through a family’s farmhouse while they sleeping. (Fortunately, no one was hurt.)

Then there’s the problem that wind is intermittent, producing electricity only about a third of the time. Can you imagine having a 1 in 3 shot that your TV or light switch turns on? This means that power plants are needed to provide electricity when the wind is not blowing. Also, the life expectancy of windmills is projected to be 20 years, which is about one fourth of the life a nuclear power plant. And by the way, nuclear power plants run 24/7.

And when the wind blows hard, those Indian turbines still don’t work. According to A.V. Dharmakrishnan, a finance director for an Indian-based power company Madras Cements, excessive wind vibrations force the turbines to run at a lower capacity and cost his company about $4 million a year. He alleged,

Turbines are not capable of producing electricity even when the wind is there.”

Remember when I said that wind power only produces electricity about one third of the time. Knock that down to one fourth of the time. Madras Cements reported that the capacity factor dropped from 37% in 2004 to 23% this year. Again, it’s worth mentioning that nuclear power generally operates above a 90% capacity factor.

So, riddle me this: How did wind proponents feel about the superior generating capacity of nuclear power?

They were blown away! But only ¼ of the time.

DENVER — This morning at the Denver Athletic Club, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) predicted that Republicans in both the House and Senate would stand firm and not vote for any legislation that would continue the Congressional ban on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).

DeMint stood behind a lectern reading “American Energy Freedom” in reference to the imminent expiration of the OCS moratorium on Sept. 30. Congress never passed a law specifically banning OCS drilling; instead it has passed the ban as part of the Interior Department appropriations bill every year since 1981.

However, since Congress has failed to pass all but one of the appropriations bills necessary to keep the federal government running, a continuing resolution will be debated when lawmakers reconvene in two weeks.

DeMint said no Republican wants a government shutdown, but that if it comes to that, 39 Republican senators and 150 Republican House members have signed letters promising not to vote for any bill that reinstates the OCS ban.

Pressed to comment on the “Gang of 10″ compromise legislation, DeMint said it gave away too much in mandates and subsidies considering how little oil it actually saved from the congressional ban. “Those senators had good intentions, but the extremists have too strong a hold on Democratic energy policy.”

Today the U.S. Census Bureau released its annual estimate of the uninsured. For some, it came as a surprise that both the rate and number of people without health insurance actually declined, from 47 million, or 15.8% in 2006, to 45.7 million, or 15.3% in 2007. For those of us who follow the numbers closely, however, it’s no surprise.

While the rate and number of uninsured has fallen, this year’s Census shows the beginning of a startling trend. The percent of Americans with private health insurance is on the decline, mostly as a result of the steady erosion of employer-based coverage, while the percentage of Americans with government insurance is rising even faster, in large part due to Medicaid and SCHIP expansions at the state level and an aging population that is becoming increasingly reliant on Medicare. Thus, the current trend is toward government dependency.

This trend clearly indicates why the status quo is simply intolerable for conservatives.

So what, then, are the policy options?

1. Continue to do nothing — and evolve toward a government-controlled health insurance system (see above).
2. Try to resuscitate or mandate private, employer-based coverage (good luck).
3. Support a “third way” that preserves and expands private coverage by evolving beyond the traditional model of employer-sponsored health insurance.

Instead of ignoring the issue of the uninsured entirely or relying on a flawed employer-based model of the past, federal and state policymakers should recognize the merits of a uniquely American path — a “third-way” — to health reform.

Under such an approach employers would have broader options and would not necessarily own and control health insurance. Instead they would have the flexibility to become facilitators of coverage by serving as the access point to personal, portable private health insurance plans. This way, patients — even those with low-incomes — would be the key decision makers in a competitive marketplace. Rethinking our insurance model, and evolving toward coverage that’s tied to the person and not the job, will better suit our increasingly dynamic economy where today working Americans overwhelmingly cycle in and out of coverage.

To enable employers to be facilitators, but not necessarily owners, of insurance policies, the federal government should move to reform the tax treatment of health insurance and transition to a system of health care tax credits. State governments could also do their part and fix their health insurance markets by establishing health insurance exchanges, where individuals and employees of small businesses could get access to personal, portable, private coverage while receiving the same favorable tax benefits that come with traditional employer-sponsored health insurance.

DENVER - Speaker Nancy Pelosi held a press conference today at Denver’s downtown Union Station and, believe it or not, she came to praise Richard Nixon. It’s not his birthday or anything, but in her continued attempt to find any traction for her energy policies Pelosi praised President Nixon for embarking on his Project Independence in 1974. Nixon was the last American president to implement prices controls on the American economy, and Pelosi had nothing but great things to say about his post OPEC oil embargo efforts to make the United States energy independent.

Pelosi’s command and control energy mandates and subsidies are a match made in heaven with Nixon’s price-control loving ways. Of course, complete energy independence is just as much of a fantasy now as it was then, but at least Pelosi didn’t try and convince the audience what a great alternative to fossil fuels natural gas was.

UPDATE — Aug. 27, 9:42 a.m.: Ed Frank of Americans for Prosperity shot video at this event. It includes Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s response to the “drill here, drill now” chants as well as her transportation home — a giant SUV.

DENVER — The air of excitement among progressive activists really is palpable here at the Democratic National Convention. Their supreme confidence that they will win the White House has been shaken a little, but they still believe Barack Obama will prevail and they are certain they will strengthen their majorities in the House and Senate. But as much as everyone here truly despises President Bush, they also refuse to credit him for all of their party’s recent electoral success. Such an argument would undermine one of their core beliefs.

As New York Times Paul Krugman put it yesterday: “America is not a conservative nation and never has been.” Arianna Huffington echoed Krugman’s assessment: “Everything that once was a left wing position, is now mainstream. We are the mainstream.”

So what are the mainstream policies the left wants government to deploy? Massive government central planning on a scale not seen since World War II, energy costs much higher than this summers high gas prices, government tracking of every U.S. citizen from cradle to grave, and government-run health care. Are these mainstream positions?

Rassmussen Reports is one of the most accurate pollsters in the country. Here are just some of their recent results on American attitude toward government: 56% of Americans believe the $170 billion stimulus package passed by Congress early this year has had no effect on the economy; 54% of Americans believe the best thing the government can do is get out of the way by reducing regulation and taxes; 62% of voters prefer fewer government services with lower taxes; 60% say higher taxes hurt the economy; and only 29% favor a national government run health care system.

Making the case that Obama’s first act as president ought to be a push for government-run health care, Krugman spun a tale about a senator visiting constituents who was told: “Senator, you need to to government out of Medicare.” For Krugman, this story proves how much Americans love big government-run health care programs like Medicare. But Krugman might want to revisit the story. If the story is true, the American in question obviously was unhappy with Medicare in some way and thought a smaller government role was the answer. After all, its not like Medicare runs well now. The system is rife with fraud and Congress has repeatedly shown it is incapable of controlling the special interests that drive Medicare’s run away costs.

A better way for both Medicare and health care reform for everyone is with a national health insurance exchange that allows Americans to choose from a wide variety of health care plans, including fee-for-service and preferred-provider options (PPOs), health maintenance organizations (HMOs), and health savings accounts (HSAs). Obama says his health care plan is like this, but there is one huge difference: Obama wants a Medicare-like program to compete with the private plans. In other words, Congress would be both a player and the umpire in the health care game. Mainstream Americans know this a recipe for disaster.

Quick Hits:

• Aides say Obama will push for a new $115 billion stimulus package if the economy is still faltering when he takes office.
• A report released today by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services found the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services underestimated Medicare and Medicaid fraud by 29% in 2006 alone.
• San Francisco Juvenile Court Commissioner Abby Abinanti found a Honduran illegal immigrant convicted of selling crack to be a victim that should be treated within the social welfare system. The ruling prevents him from being treated as a criminal and deported from the country.
• In a direct challenge to Russia, the United States announced it intends to deliver humanitarian aid to the beleaguered Georgian port city of Poti.
• Less than two months after it blew up the cooling tower of its main nuclear plant in a televised spectacle, North Korea announced that it has suspended the dismantlement of its nuclear program.

DENVER — Monday’s best attended panel by far was “The Contest: Progressives vs. Conservatives,” featuring Paul Krugman, Arianna Huffington, John Podesta and David Sirota. Each spoke for seven minutes. Highlights include:

Podesta announced he is working with Mark Green and tapping the resources at the Center for American Progress to write a progressive version of The Heritage Foundation’s 1981 “Mandate for Leadership.” Just as the Mandate was intended to be a blueprint for Ronald Reagan’s first administration, Podesta’s book is also intended to be a guide for Barack Obama to transform every federal department.

Huffington, founder of the liberal Huffington Post, stressed that the “right vs. left” framework marginalizes progressive ideas. She argued that what were once left-wing positions are now mainstream. Allowing the debate to be framed as “right vs. left” makes it harder for the left to own the center.

Krugman, the liberal New York Times columnist, made the case that America was never a conservative nation. He claimed Americans love Social Security and Medicare and they are going to love government-run health care, too. Krugman predicted that the left would win strong majorities in the House and Senate and would win the White House. But, in order to secure their new majority, they must do “something” with government to “fundamentally change people’s lives.” For Krugman, he hoped that “something” would be health care and that Obama would make it his first priority.

The most impassioned of the speakers, political journalist and author Sirota said that Democrats are not doing enough to harness the mood for change in the country. He said there are two big issues Democrats hate to talk about, but must if they are going to be successful: immigration and trade. Sirota said he did not support the Minuteman Project’s preferred policy solutions for our border with Mexico, but that he did agree with the group that corporate America had conspired with government to weaken our nation’s borders. He then made the same case on trade, arguing that Democrats must reject free trade entirely if they want to capture the populist sentiment in the country. Sirota’s model Democrat is Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), who won on a protectionist populist platform. Sirota hopes all Democrats will follow his model.

DENVER — The Big Tent is sponsoring no less than 10 panels about global warming this week, and Robert Kennedy Jr. was the star of one titled “Climate Problems and Solutions: Local to Global.” The panelists all agreed that cap and trade was the only possible legislation that had a chance of passing, since it was the only way to get the business community on board. But even then, the panel also agreed that the carbon caps set in this summer’s Lieberman-Warner bill were far too low to produce the reductions in carbon necessary to save the planet.

Kennedy pointed to this summer’s high gas prices as proof that energy prices had to rise significantly higher:

This summers high gas prices were essentially an energy tax. But they did not effect behavior enough. Driving only decreased by .02%. The price of carbon must be much higher.

• Joe Biden’s So-So Record on Trade - Cato-at-Liberty

During his long tenure in the Senate, Joe Biden of Delaware has compiled a mixed record on votes affecting our freedom to participate in the global economy. The record of the Democratic vice-presidential…

• Amtrak Ridership at “Record” Levels, More Subsidies Needed - Government Bytes

News stories this week cited the fact that Amtrak ridership has risen significantly in recent months in response to high gas prices. In a free market, a record number of riders would mean record profits (or at least increased profits), but Amtrak…

• Report from Denver: Joining Together as Friends of New Orleans - Shopfloor.org

It is rare at a political convention to see a non-partisan event.Thanks to a dedicated group of sponsors – including NAM members Shell, Phrma, Entergy, Nuclear Energy Institute, American Chemistry Council, American Gas Association…

• Pounding Private Equity - WSJ.com

Give Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern credit for tenacity. Fresh off his California failure to pressure private equity to accede to his demands, Mr. Stern has moved on to Washington state…