People for the West -Tucson
Newsletter, June, 2021
PO Box 86868, Tucson, AZ 85754-6868
Real environmentalism can go hand in hand with natural resource production, private property rights, and access to public lands
STATE OF THE UNION
Government Spending versus the Constitution
by Jonathan DuHamel
Federal spending is going wild. Some say the “general welfare” clause of the Constitution allows such spending, but much of the spending is not authorized by the Constitution. Lets take a closer look:
From the Tenth Amendment Center (link):
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution, the “General Welfare clause,” is often referred to as the “Taxing and Spending Clause” because of its expansive use today. Many people claim it gives the feds the authority to do anything imaginable as long as it “promotes the general welfare” – however one might define it. But this creates a dilemma. Either James Madison and other supporters of the Constitution were lying when they said the powers of the federal government would be “few and defined,” or people have misconstrued the legal meaning of this clause. The existence of enumerated powers resolves this dilemma. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist #83: “This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” James Madison reinforced this view in a letter to Henry Lee: “What think you of [Hamilton’s] commentary … on the terms ‘general welfare?’ The federal Govt. has been hitherto limited to the Specified powers… If not only the means, but the objects are unlimited, the parchment had better be thrown into the fire at once.” In a legal document, the enumeration of specific powers logically excludes all powers not listed. This is a legal maxim – Designato unius est exclusio alterius – meaning, “the designation of one is the exclusion of the other.” It follows from this construction that Congress has the authority to tax and spend for the general welfare, but the enumerated powers limit the federal government’s spending power to specific objects. As Rob Natelson put it in his paper, The General Welfare Clause and the Public Trust: “The clause was designed as a trust-style rule denying Congress authority to levy taxes for any but general, national purposes. Because the Clause prevented Congress from using tax revenue for local or special interest purposes, the Clause indirectly qualified the appropriation power. Even if some enumerated power could be enlisted to support the appropriation, federal tax money was not to be used for the private benefit of a museum-however worthy-in Savannah, nor an artist-however struggling-in New York.” To take the clause as a general grant of power for the federal government to do anything that promotes the general welfare would, as Madison put it, “would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”
From the Cato Institute (link):
So what about the General Welfare Clause, the first of Congress’s 18 powers? To be sure, the clause was inartfully drafted, like several other provisions in the Constitution. But it was understood by nearly all as granting Congress the power simply to tax (in limited ways). The terms “common Defence” and “general Welfare” were meant merely as general headings under which the 17 other specific powers or ends were subsumed.
Some of the high-priced items in the Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan are:
• $100 billion for high-speed broadband;
• $16 billion to put people to work plugging oil and gas wells;
• $213 billion for affordable housing;
• $100 billion for school construction;
• $25 billion for child-care facilities;
• $400 billion for care for the elderly and the disabled;
• $180 billion for research and development, including $35 billion earmarked for climate-related research (again, think “Green New Deal by installment”);
• $300 billion for business and manufacturing; and
• $100 billion for workforce development programs.
Aside from the staggering price tags, all of these programs have something else in common: Not one of them is remotely legitimate under the Constitution and its limited writ of federal authority.
This article lists all powers granted to the federal government by the Constitution. ☼
Consumer Prices Outpace Americans’ Wage Growth As Inflation Surges
by Thomas Catenacci, Daily Caller
Massive government spending has decreased the value of the American dollar and triggered increased consumer prices, which economic experts said will only get worse. Americans will continue to see higher prices across the board, from food and gasoline to home appliances and cars, as the federal government continues to propose more stimulus into the economy without an adequate plan to pay for it, according to several experts. Even if the government doesn’t pass legislation increasing taxes, higher prices ultimately amount to an “inflation tax,” some of the experts said. (Read more) ☼
Support Nullification to Enforce the Constitution
Nullification is firmly grounded in the text of the U.S. Constitution, specifically Article VI. It states: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land.” This clearly implies that laws not in accordance with the Constitution are null and void. Additionally, the 10th Amendment makes clear that all powers not granted by the Constitution to the federal government are reserved to the states and to the people. By enforcing this important constitutional provision alone, the states can push back against a significant portion of federal overreach. (Source) ☼
Biden’s radical 30 X 30 plan will ensure that this land will no longer be your land
By Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.
Moving rapidly to transition the United States away from fossil fuels in the name of combating climate change, the Biden administration is employing a mix of executive authority and legislative action to force the transformation. The “30 x 30 Plan” calls on the United States to “achieve the goal of conserving at least 30 percent of our lands and waters by 2030.”
Alarmed by what they fear is Washington’s interference in state land-use decisions, governors from 15 states stretching from Alabama to Alaska have signed a letter of protest to the White House.
“[We] are not aware of any constitutional or statutory authority for the President, the U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, or any other federal agency to set aside and permanently preserve 30 percent of all land and water in the United States,” they wrote. “Nowhere in the laws of our nation is the authority delegated by Congress to the President or executive branch agencies to unilaterally change the policies governing land use in America.”
“Obtaining the 30 percent goal would require your Administration to condemn or otherwise severely limit the current productive uses of such lands, infringing on the private property rights of our citizens and significantly harming our economies,” they added. (Read more) ☼
Economically Destructive Cap and Trade for HFCs Is Here
by David Wojick
Wryheat summary: Remember back in 1987 the Montreal Protocol mandated the phase out of CFCs, the primary refrigerant and aerosol propellant at the time. CFCs were globally replaced with HFCs, at great expense and bother. That allegedly was to protect the ozone layer. Now the EPA wants to replace HFCs which do not threaten the ozone layer, so they have nothing to do with the Montreal Protocol. But the Protocol community decided to do what is called “mission creep”. Remember the giant Omnibus Appropriations Act passed in February? It funded the federal government and the COVID stimulus to the tune of $2.3 trillion. It also, as usual, included some riders that probably could not pass by themselves. Keep in mind that some of the many primary uses of HFCs, in vast quantities, are these:
Air conditioning in cars, homes and big buildings
Refrigerators, freezers and chillers
Electric power transformers
According to the Wall Street Journal:
“The proposal would create a process for reducing the use of hydrofluorocarbons in cooling appliances, the first step toward meeting new mandates to cut their supply by 85% over 15 years, the EPA said. Congress passed that mandate in December in provisions included in a $2 trillion spending and Covid-19 aid package. HFCs were originally developed in the 1980’s, and fervently championed by environmentalists, to replace other coolants they claimed were allegedly damaging the planet. Now they oppose them on the same grounds. The new move to phase out HFCs is said to be supported by those in the industry who are poised to make big profits on the forced switch to new products. (Source) ☼
IEA: U.S. Lacks Critical Minerals, Biden’s Policies Benefit China
from One America News Network
The International Energy Agency (IEA) warned Joe Biden’s policies are bolstering Chinese control over the global supply of critical minerals. In a new report, the IEA said the U.S. is lacking a stable supply of rare earth materials along with copper, cobalt and lithium. The agency pointed out that China controls between 60 and 90 percent of the supply of such minerals, which are mainly used in advanced electronics and clean energy production. (Read more) (read IEA report) ☼
Joe Biden’s Offshore Wind Energy Mirage
by Craig Rucker
President Biden recently announced ambitious plans to install huge offshore industrial wind facilities along America’s Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, and Pacific coasts. His goal is to churn out 30 gigawatts (30,000 megawatts) of wind capacity by 2030, ensuring the U.S. “leads by example” in fighting the “climate crisis.” Granted “30 by 2030” is clever PR. But what are the realities? Mr. Biden is planning 10,000 MW for each coast. While that might sound impressive, it isn’t. It means total wind capacity for the entire Atlantic coast, under Biden’s plan, would only meet three-fourths of the peak summertime electricity needed to power New York City. (Read more) ☼
Advocacy Group Gives Biden An ‘F’ For Energy Policies In First 100 Days
by Penny Starr
The Empowerment Alliance (TEA), a 501 C-4 that advocates for free markets and domestic energy independence, released a report card on President Joe Biden’s energy policies in his first 100 days in office, giving him an “F” for each of the four pillars of its Declaration of Energy Independence. Unfortunately, our nation’s energy and climate picture couldn’t be cloudier after Biden’s first 100 days in office. The new administration’s policy decisions and public statements take a decidedly anti-energy turn. Instead of unleashing the potential of our domestic energy industry, the Biden administration walled it off and locked it down. (Read more) ☼
See also: LIGHTS OUT How Green Mandates are Undermining the Affordability and Reliability of Electricity (13 pages)
And: What Biden And The Environmental Left Are Really Planning For Us by Francis Menton
Regarding energy: “We are dealing here with completely crazed zealots, bent on a moral crusade to save the world. With a complete absence of adult supervision in the Biden Administration, these people have taken over and are running the show. At this point, the best we can hope for is that they will actually implement some of this nonsense, and it will then fail spectacularly.”
Physics Prof. Concludes Doubling CO2 Adds Just 0.5°C; ‘Cannot Affect Climate’
by Kenneth Richard
A new CO2 climate sensitivity study suggests that beyond the 300 ppm threshold, “any further increase of (anthropogenic) CO2 cannot lead to an appreciably stronger absorption of radiation, and consequently cannot affect the earth’s climate.” (Read more) P.S. CO2 is now at 419ppm. ☼
President Biden’s New CO2 Emission Policy is Anti-Science and the Real Existential Threat to Humanity and Nature
by Craig Idso, CO2Science
In addressing the Virtual Leaders Summit on Climate, President Biden announced a new U.S. energy policy objective to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 50% over the next eight-and-a-half years, and a full 100% a decade after that. To accomplish this feat, the President promised to implement a transformative “whole-of-government approach” to change how energy is produced and consumed across all sectors of society. In a nutshell, the President and others like him insist rising emissions of atmospheric CO2 have placed the planet on a no-return trajectory toward climate apocalypse. Without immediate widespread curtailing of energy use and the scaling back CO2 emissions to net-zero, they claim global temperatures will quickly rise to “dangerous” levels and cause a host of warming-induced catastrophes (e.g., heatwaves, drought, floods, super hurricanes, etc.), unleashing the aptly-named “existential threat” of climate change on the world and its inhabitants. But how accurate is this narrative?
As one who has professionally studied the potential impacts of rising atmospheric CO2 on climate and the biosphere for over three decades now, with absolute sincerity and certainty I can answer it is woefully inaccurate. Rising CO2 is not presently causing, nor will humanity’s emissions of this trace gas into the atmosphere ever be sufficient enough to cause, dangerous global warming or any of the ancillary-related climate catastrophes so postulated by the President and others. (Read more) ☼
Changing Reality to Conform with Policy:
‘Inconvenient’ U.S. Wildfire Data Has Been ‘Disappeared’ by National Interagency Fire Center
by Anthony Watts
The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) has been the keeper of U.S. wildfire data for decades, tracking both the number of wildfires and acreage burned all the way back to 1926. However, after making that entire dataset public for decades, now, in a blatant act of cherry picking, NIFC “disappeared” a portion of it, and only show data from 1983. (Read more)
EPA “Disappears” the 1930s Drought and Heat Wave Climate Data
by Larry Hamlin
The EPA has deleted (this chart and data no longer exist at the EPA website) its prior indicator climate data trend chart showing “unusually hot and cold temperatures” across the U.S. and showing the U.S. Heat Wave Index from 1895 to 2015 (shown below) that clearly established the unique drought and heat period of the 1930s. (Read more and see graphs) ☼
Climate Claim Fact Checks Updated
Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, go to Link to see original and contained links to supporting data
Below are a series of fact checks of the 13 most common climate claims such as those made in the recently released Fourth National Climate Assessment Report. The authors of these reviews are all recognized experts in the relevant fields. For each claim, a summary of the relevant rebuttal is provided below along with a link to the full text of the rebuttal, which includes the names and the credentials of the authors of each rebuttal.
Climate Change Claim Fact Checks With updates through 04/26/21
Claims that the globe has experienced the warmest ever month or year are unsupported by data and are in reality politically driven fictions.
Heat Waves – have been decreasing since the 1930s in the U.S. and globally.
Hurricanes – the decade just ended as the second quietest for landfalling. hurricanes and landfalling major hurricanes in the U.S since the 1850s. 2020 saw a record 30 named storms and many Gulf impacts like the quiet solar periods in the late 1800s and this century, but the ACE index ranked 13th highest. See 2020 Update showing similarities to late 1800s here and global contrasts here.
Tornadoes – the number of strong tornadoes has declined over the last half century. More active months occur when unseasonable cold spring patterns are present.
Droughts and Floods – there has no statistically significant trends
Wildfires – decreasing since the very active 1800s. The increase in damage in recent years is due to population growth in vulnerable areas and poor forest management. See Australia Wildfire story here. See this analysis that shows how public lands are ablaze but private lands are not because they are properly managed here.
Snowfall – has been increasing in the fall and winter in the Northern Hemisphere and North America with many records being set.
Sea level – the rate of global sea level rise on average has fallen by 40% the last century. Where today, it is increasing – local factors such as land subsidence are to blame. See how sea level trends are being adjusted here.
Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland Ice – the polar ice varies with multidecadal cycles in ocean temperatures. Current levels are comparable to or above historical low levels. Arctic ice returned to higher levels with a very cold winter in 2019/20. Ice was highest level since 2013.
Alaska July 2019 heat records/ winter 2019/20 cold – the hot July resulted from a warm North Pacific and reduced ice in the Bering Sea late winter due to strong storms. Record ice extent occurred with record cold in 2012. 2019/20 has been the third coldest winter in Fairbanks since the Great Pacific Climate Shift in the late 1970s.
Ocean Acidification” – when life is considered, ocean acidification (really slightly reduced alkalinity) is a non-problem, or even a benefit.
Carbon Pollution as a health hazard – carbon dioxide (CO2) is an odorless invisible trace gas that is plant food and it is essential to life on the planet. CO2 is not a pollutant.
Climate change is endangering food supply – the vitality of global vegetation in both managed and unmanaged ecosystems is better off now than it was a hundred years ago, 50 years ago, or even a mere two-to-three decades ago thanks in part to CO2.
There is a 97% consensus that climate change is man-made – a 97% consensus is a convenient fiction meant to bypass the scientific method and sway public opinion and drive societal changes and policies that support political agendas.
See the detailed rebuttals here. Each section details claim and links to a detailed scientific analysis with supporting graphics and links. ☼
What happened to global warming?
The website Electroverse keeps track of global weather. Here are some recent headlines:
This unusual cold could be part of a La Niña cycle or it could be the start of a grand solar minimum. See: Is Recent Record Cold Just La Niña, or the Onset of Global Cooling?☼
ARTICLES FROM MY WRYHEAT BLOG:
Papers from The Science and Environmental Policy Project of the Heartland Institute:
Full Text of Climate Change Reconsidered (868 pages)
Full Text of CCR: Interim Report – an update of Climate Change Reconsidered (432 pages)
Full Text of CCR II: Physical Science (1,004 pages)
Full Text of CCR II: Fossil Fuels (782 pages)
Full Text of CCR II: Biological Impacts (1,078 pages)
Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming (135 pages) ☼
PC AND CLIMATE MADNESS
Brewery creates nasty ‘Torched Earth Ale’ to show how climate change will affect beer taste
by Kaelan Deese, The Washington Examiner
The Colorado-based company New Belgium Brewing released a beer that purposely tastes bad to illustrate how climate change may affect the beer industry. (Read more) ☼
Climate activists now trying to cancel pets!
Pet Police have arrived: ‘Expert suggested reducing rate of dog & cat ownership in favor of other animals’ to reduce ‘pets’ carbon footprint’ – Equal to emissions of 13 million cars! (Read more) See also: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/4/inside-the-beltway-climate-alarmists-could-cancel-/ ☼
The folly of Wokeness:
These two articles discuss “wokeness”; its origins and fate:
Charge That “Soap Dispensers” Prove “Systemic Racism” Reflects a Deeper, Darker Problem
by Selwyn Duke
“What mighty contests rise from trivial things,” wrote poet Alexander Pope. This could come to mind when considering a claim, made with straight faces, that soap dispensers prove there’s “systemic racism.” Yet ridiculous though it is, the charge reflects something deeper in American life — something very dark and dangerous. (Read more) ☼
POINTS TO PONDER
“Let’s be really clear. The 1619 Project is not history. … Of course we need to teach history. We need to teach about slavery … but we also need to teach how our country has continued to aspire for and work toward a more perfect union. And the answer to racism and discrimination in our country is not to then adopt another form of racism, which is exactly what the 1619 Project suggests.” —former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos
“There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are ‘just’ because the law makes them so.” —Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850)
“The dumbing down of America is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudo-science and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.” —Carl Sagan
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” —Patrick Henry (1788)
* * *
1) Support private property rights.
2) Support multiple use management of federal lands for agriculture, livestock grazing, mining, oil and gas production, recreation, timber harvesting and water development activities.
3) Support a balance of environmental responsibility and economic benefit for all Americans by urging that environmental policy be based on good science and sound economic principles.
Newsletters can be viewed online on Jonathan’s Wryheat Blog:
See my essay on climate change:
If you like murder mysteries, try Lonni’s novels. See descriptions and links at:
The Constitution is the real contract with America.
* * *
People for the West – Tucson, Inc.
PO Box 86868
Tucson, AZ 85754-6868
Jonathan DuHamel, President & Editor
Dr. John Forrester, Vice President
Lonni Lees, Associate Editor
People for the West – Tucson, Inc. is an Arizona tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) corporation. Newsletter subscriptions are free.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.