Image Image

  Nostalgia ain't what it used to be

Tuesday, 24 November, 2020

A Snow Job From Hobbs

Date: 01 August, 2009

By: Chief

Imagearry Teague, freshman Congressman for the Second Congressional District of New Mexico, has been in deep 'do-do' since his "aye" vote on bill HR 2454, the so called "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009."

In fact Dear Harry is in so much trouble over his vote that:

in order to attempt to explain why he voted direct in contravention to the wishes of We the People of the district. I received mine on July 29, 2009.

National security

Harry wrote (quoting his flyer):

"Energy independence is about more than energy, it's about our national security. That's why I voted for legislation to reduce our dependence on foreign oil."

Uh oh, Harry just hit the panic button. Why? He did it to protect us from them 'Middle Eastern varmints'.

Indeed if you care to look on the cover of his flyer there is a map of the world. The United States, in blue, with New Mexico in yellow and the rest of the world in gray. Oh, except for the middle east. It is in red. The caption reads (quoting his flyer):

"Why not create our own energy HERE [U.S. and New Mexico]

. . . . . .

"instead of buying it from HERE? [Middle East]"

Face it, hitting the national security panic button and Middle East hatred button is basically the next thing to a grand slam in baseball.

Is it true

No. It is not at all true. According to the U.S. Department of Energy our imports of oil come from the following countries (Total imports of petroleum products, top five countries only, in thousands of barrels per day):

If you want to read the entire top 15 oil or petroleum exporters list, you can do so here.

My, my, my. Isn't that strange? Harry's world map does not include:

as part of his evil oil exporting countries.

I wonder just why that would be? If I can find the information just by doing a quick Google search, well why can't Harry? Could it possibly be his staff is utterly incompetent? I suppose that could be the case. But I doubt it. It would make no sense to hire imbeciles — though it is possible.

No, I believe Harry did it, or had it done — willfully or deliberately. Why? Who knows? I suspect it was done to mislead us into believing that Dear Harry did what he did to:

However, no matter how you slice it what Dear Harry did was commit a lie. Indeed, a fraud. And fraud, as we all know, when committed by an elected person, is — malfeasance.

In his flyer Harry said:

"I knew we needed to keep this bill away from production because we need more energy in this country, and putting taxes on the folks who produce it makes them produce less energy, not more."

Really Harry? How benevolent of you.

While it maybe correct to say there are no new or additional "taxes" being placed on energy producers, HR 2454, the bill our very own Harry Teague voted in favor of, is chock full of:

Here is just one small example:


"(d) Assessments-

"(1) AMOUNT-

"(A) In all calendar years following its establishment, the Corporation shall collect an assessment on distribution utilities for all fossil fuel-based electricity delivered directly to retail consumers (as determined under subsection (f)). The assessments shall reflect the relative carbon dioxide emission rates of different fossil fuel-based electricity, and initially shall be not less than the following amounts for coal, natural gas, and oil:

[ ... ]

"Fuel type Rate of assessment per kilowatt hour

"Coal                  $0.00043

"Natural Gas      $0.00022

"Oil                     $0.00032."

It may sound like nothing but it adds up real quick.

So, while there currently are no new or additional taxes — there are plenty of other things in the bill which shall increase costs to energy producers. This means increased costs to We the People — in the form of everything. And I mean just that — everything.

We do not have to like it but everything we purchase is:

using some form of energy. And using it continuously. Diesel and coal being the top two alleged offenders, according to provisions contained within this ugly bill.

Hence I would have to say that Dear Harry's no "taxes" statement is, once again, extremely misleading. Do the words:

ring a bell? I thought they would. Because that is what I think we have here.

Oh, did I forget to mention Harry's business is in the oil industry? Well now you know.

Moving right along (quoting the flyer):

"Right now, we are sending over 400 billion a year to foreign countries to pay for foreign oil. Through efficiency, producing more American oil and gas and creating new energy jobs in wind, solar, biomass, geothermal, nuclear and hydropower, we will lessen our dangerous dependence on foreign energy and save consumers money."

But is it true (Am I starting to sound like a broken record)?

The part I like the best of the above quote is the "producing more American oil" part. Why? Allow me to quote from Section 127 of the bill:

"(a) Findings- The Congress finds that--

"(1) the status of oil as a strategic commodity, which derives from its domination of the transportation sector, presents a clear and present danger to the United States[.]"

Okay, now would you please explain to me just how oil, which presents "a clear and present danger to the United States," could possibly lead to increased:

how "we will lessen our dangerous dependence on foreign energy and save consumers money?" To me, it is a contradiction in terms.

Furthermore, should you read the bill, you will note that most of the bill concerns:

Pertaining to "hydropower," the bill stipulates that existing hydro-electric plants must be made more efficient. BFD.

As for nuclear power plants, it is a joke. The bill almost exclusively deals with financing. Not making it easier, regulatory wise, to build nuclear power plants. Oh no. just specifically the prevailing wage. Which, as usual, drives costs up.

Additionally, as I have written about before, shale oil is present in huge amounts in Colorado and Utah. Royal Dutch Shell came up with a reliable method for extraction at a reasonable cost — approximately $35.00 per barrel, in 2005. Yet neither the bill or Dear Harry bother to mention that little jewel.

It's the Green River Basin. Which covers more than a thousand square miles — the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world. Approximately one billion barrels per square mile. But Dear Harry doesn't want us to know about that.

Why is that — Harry?

Time to take a look at one last quote from Harry's flyer:

"Average annual household energy expenditures rose approximately $1,000 between 2001 and 2007, but Congress did not act to stop the demand crunch that was causing your energy costs to spike. This bill aims both to diversify America's energy resources and boost energy efficiency, so household energy costs can be more stable."

WTF? "[B]ut Congress did not act to stop the demand crunch that was causing your energy costs to spike."

What is Congress going to do? Make using electricity illegal? What kind of asininity is that? Yeah, you're, as usual, right — Complete.

Please attend to the fact that, we cannot have a "demand crunch" unless, first, there is a crunch in:

And thanks to the environmental wackos, Congress and the legislatures of the several states a plethora of laws and regulations have been enacted over several decades which do nothing but basically stop the flow of energy in its tracks.

The oil and power industries are not pure as the driven snow either. Big oil has shut down refineries and production fields. Exploration has slowed as well. Power companies have not really attempted to build new power production facilities to keep up with our ever increasing population.

Wall Street is just as guilty as oil and power companies.

So Harry's statement is completely without merit. As is Dear Harry.

Why is that — Harry?

Lastly, the bill makes no mention of:

The bill does cater to the environmental wackos. No one else. Yet Dear Harry voted "aye" for this abomination.

Once again, why is that — Harry?

Judging from Dear Harry's vote on HR 2454 and his subsequent 'I'm a good guy, really' flyer, it is clear, to me at least, that Harry Teague is in the pocket of the environmental wackos and the Democratic National Committee. It is equally clear Harry Teague does not represent We the People of the Second Congressional District of New Mexico. Lastly his flyer is misleading and, as such, fraudulent.

I think it is time to consider a recall of Harry Teague.

[Story update.] While Harry Teague was not recalled — neither was he reelected. He got the boot after one term. Who was his replacement? None other than Steve Pearce (sigh).

(Return to the top)