As Speaker of the Assembly, Jeff Fitzgerald had the courage to fight for a conservative vision instead of just kicking the can down the road.  Not only did Fitzgerald pass regulatory and tort reform, he, with Governor Walker and other fellow Republicans,  eliminated a $3.6 billion without employing one-time accounting gimmicks, raising taxes, or raiding segregated funds like his predecessors did.

Congress currently has a 9 percent approval rating because its members consistently abandon their duties to our great nation. It is time we elect someone who is willing and able to make the tough decisions before it is too late.   If history is the best predictor of the future, Wisconsin and America will have a bright future with Jeff Fitzgerald in the US Senate.

This day, Cost of Government Day (COGD), is annually tracked by ATR.

It took 224 days for Americans to earn enough money to cover the cost of government this year, 226 days in 2009 and 2010.  Prior to 2009, Cost of Government Day never fell later than July 21.  In 2008, Cost of Government Day was July 16.

According to ATR, the cost of government is equivalent to 61.42 percent of the national annual income earned by the American workforce.

The average American has to work 77 days alone to pay for his or her share of the U.S. regulatory burden.

Cost of Government Day is not to be confused with Tax Freedom Day, which only accounts for how long it takes Americans to earn enough to pay their federal, state, and local taxes for the calendar year. This year Tax Freedom Day fell on April 12.

Accounting for deficit spending is key in Cost of Government Day calculations. Federal spending, at 103 days, is the largest component, according to ATR.  Since 2001, there has been a 91.4 percent increase in federal spending.  Obama’s spending has created the three largest deficits in American history, and the federal deficit is the largest percentage of GDP it has been since WWII.

The Toxic Asset Relief Program (TARP) and President Obama’s economic stimulus added six days alone this year to COGD.

If the 2012 House budget plan authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) had become law, ATR estimates that COGD would decrease by 18 days.

To address a forecasted climb in COGD, ATR suggests two possible remedies: repeal TARP and the stimulus plan – and pay federal employees at the private sector market rate. If both were adopted, ATR estimates federal spending would decrease enough to move COGD back to Aug. 3.

–

Originally published on CNSNews.com: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/224-days-later-americans-finally-earn-en

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  During the summer of 2011, he interned as a reporter for CNS News, a division of the Media Research Center

Eighty-two (82) percent of the 1,000 people polled said members of Congress should take a 25 percent pay cut until the federal budget is balanced. That is an increase from last August, when 75 percent of the respondents who were asked the same question – “Should members of Congress take a 25percent pay cut until the Federal Budget is balanced?” said, “Yes.”

In the lastest poll, meanwhile, when Rasmussen asked if the president should take a 50 percent pay cut until the budget is balanced, only 48 percent of those polled said yes.

Republicans overwhelmingly agreed (64 percent) that the president should sacrifice half of his pay, as did a 49 percent plurality of independents, but 57 percent of Democrats polled said they did not think the president should take a 50 percent pay cut.

In other findings, only 30 percent of those polled think that a balanced federal budget is “somewhat likely” in their lifetime, according to Rasmussen.  Fewer than half of the people polled believe the cuts in the debt compromise bill will materialize.

Regardless of whether the federal budget is balanced, 59 percent of those polled believe that members of Congress should not receive federal pensions after leaving office.  Fifty-two (52) percent said that former presidents shouldn’t receive a pension, which currently amount to $200,000 per year.

The survey of 1,000 likely voters was conducted July 28-29. The margin of error is plus-or-minus 3 percentage points, with a 95 percent level of confidence.

–

Originally published on CNSNews.com: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rasmussen-poll-82-percent-americans-say

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  During the summer of 2011, he interned as a reporter for CNS News, a division of the Media Research Center.

Yesterday in a private meeting John Boehner used a movie clip to light a fire in his conference to (insert your candid observations here). I guess to pass the Boehner Plan.

The movie of choice: The Town. In the movie, Ben Affleck tells his friend “I need your help. I can’t tell you what it is. You can never ask me about it later and we’re gonna hurt some people.”

Affleck’s friend responds “whose car are we going to take?”

(See the video clip here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFtZxJGsPGc)

After the screening, Rep Allen West (R-FL) reportedly stood up and said “I’m ready to drive the car.”

DNC Chairwoman and Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz responded to this display by saying “I’m sure Republicans will think we’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” “It tells you all you need to know. … Their uncompromising position would hurt the American people.”

In my summer internship with CNS News, I actually sat on a conference call with Chairwoman Schultz. And if I could have asked her anything it would be this: You responded strongly to the House Republican Conference showing a clip of The Town during a closed door meeting to psych up legislators saying that “I’m sure Republicans will think we’re making a mountain out of a molehill,” “It tells you all you need to know. … Their uncompromising position would hurt the American people.” But haven’t President Obama and Democrats in both houses been uncompromising as the Senate prepares to reject the Boehner plan (as they also rejected the House budget proposed by Paul Ryan and Cut, Cap, and Balance), and they have failed to deal with the impending debt crisis during the two and a half years President Obama has been in office.

Ms. Schultz obviously forgot the molehills of her political past. But more importantly, she forgets that the Boehner Plan is the third plan to be proposed by the House since the inauguration of the 112th Congress.

What is even more remarkable though is what a co-worker of mine pronounced so eloquently at the lunch table yesterday afternoon. The Republican leaders do not know how to negotiate. They are in fact playing into the hands of Harry Reid and Barack Obama. The Senate and President have yet to pass a plan. In fact, no debt plan received serious consideration in the Senate until Harry Reid released his budget plan this past week. What has the GOP done? Proposed three separate plans, the latest all but capitulating to the Democratic Party. If negotiation is about coming to a middle ground, it is easy to see how the Senate feels less than compelled to do so. There is no pressure. When the Ryan Plan failed, the House devised Cut, Cap, and Balance. When the Cut, Cap, and Balance, didn’t pass the Senate, it was the carnation of the Boehner Plan. The Boehner Plan, even after revision to meet Boehner’s campaign promises, is dwarfed in real cuts by the Harry Reid Plan. The Senate has the House cowering. They are prepared to give lip service to the cause of smaller government while getting the Republican House to tie its own noose. The Senate hasn’t had to put any skin in the game, so the media cannot burn them.

The Prisoner’s Dilemma would suggest that if both parties do nothing in the debt battle, the country will go off the cliff, a lose-lose situation. Of course, in an era of divided government neither the House nor Senate will get all that it wants, thus, they must compromise to achieve the most mutually beneficial political outcome and enact some necessary reforms.

But, the House doesn’t seem to understand that it is the Senate’s turn to propose a plan, so the two houses can enter a legislative conference. Nope. Boehner has managed not only to look less committed to deficit reduction than the party that has in 2.5 years since securing the presidency out spent 43 preceding administrations, but he has also alienated conservative members of his own caucus, pissed off the party base, and if we go forward with this Obamanation (yes, I said it) of a bill, he will undoubtedly secure the political demise of his own colleagues.

Like a nuclear war, mutually assured destruction is a motivator in politics too, and with the House controlling the purse strings and endowed with a popular mandate for fiscal reform, they have the upper hand to get the Senate to break from politics as usual.

But with the Boehner Plan, the House gave away their strategic advantage. Now, the Senate can get most of what it wants, preserve the big government status quo, and watch the Republicans in the House get shellacked.

Since August 2nd is not do or die, there is no need to be selling out, but there is a need for Boehner to grow a pair or be replaced by someone who can. Someone who is willing to go balls out on reigning in spending and ending the perverted perpetual debt supported government growth as America asked them to last November needs to show themselves soon. Democrats according to conventional wisdom should have to move towards the right on the debt crisis.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD) in a Pen and Pad session said that he would have preferred to see $4 trillion in cuts. Perhaps, we could still make his day!

–

Originally published on the Founders Compass: http://www.thefounderscompass.com/uncategorized/boehner-cant-seem-to-stand-his-ground-capitulates-to-the-left/

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  He is the current media intern for a Wisconsin Tea Party net start up: the Founders Compass

At his weekly pen-and-pad session on Tuesday, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) expressed harsh criticism for Republicans in the House of Representatives.

“Unfortunately, we are not yet having an adult moment,” Hoyer said.

“Unfortunately, we continue to hold hostage the credit of the United States and the economy of the United States and, indeed, the global markets,” he said.

Hoyer characterized the current budget battle between Republicans and Democrats as a “sorry, irresponsible spectacle.”

He then likened Republican leaders to baseball great Barry Bonds, saying that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and the rest of the Republican leadership had done nothing but “walk” on the debt issue.

“We’ve seen the Republicans walk more than Barry Bonds,” he said.

According to Hoyer, Boehner has walked out of negotiations twice. Hoyer, however, did not mention the fact that President Obama walked out of a debt meeting on July 13.

Hoyer also said that Boehner’s proposal of spending cuts in exchange for a rise in the debt ceiling “is not a good one.”

Hoyer said it was hypocritical that Boehner released his current plan at around 11:30 pm on Monday night, especially after Republicans had criticized Democrats for ramming through the stimulus bill and the Obamacare health care bill at the last minute.

The House last week passed the “Cut, Cap, and Balance Plan,” but it was rejected by the Democrat-led Senate prior to Boehner introducing his new plan.

House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio waits to speak during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, July 12, 2011, as the budget talks continued. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

Hoyer said he did not think Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) plan went far enough, stressing that he wanted to see $4 trillion in spending cuts.

When asked by a reporter what the way out of the debt mess is, he responded: “The Reid plan is the way out.”

Reid’s plan claims to cut the deficit by $2.7 trillion while Boehner’s plan claims to cut the deficit by $3 trillion.

Despite projections that President Obama is incurring a record amount of national debt, Hoyer blamed the bloated federal government on President Bush who, according to Hoyer, added $5 trillion dollars to the national debt.

Hoyer said: “They [Republicans] incurred this debt. We participated in that. People were advantaged by things we bought with the money. We stabilized the economy.  According to the Republicans, we are defending freedom, and I believe that, abroad, saving us from terrorism. Investing in our kid’s education, making sure the American dream is still alive. But too many people are taking a walk at a time of great crisis and challenge.  Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots.  That may sound corny, but this is a time of such crisis. This is when summer soldiers and sunshine patriots take a walk on their country. Not on Obama.  Not on Democrats in Congress. They take a walk on their country and its people.”

In fixing the federal debt, has anyone considered addressing the federal payscale?

As states and the federal government face tight budgets, and some people demand
governors take pay cuts, 77,000 federal employees make more money than their home
state governors according to a Congressional Research Service report.

As of September 2009, Colorado, Maryland, Arizona, Alabama, and Florida had the
most federal employees earning more than the governor. Colorado, which had the most
federal employees earning more than the governor, had 10,875 employees earning more
than the $90,000 governor’s salary. Maryland had the second highest number of federal
employees earning more than the governor with 7,283 employees earning more than the
$150,000 governor’s salary. Colorado’s governor is among the lowest paid governors in
the nation while Maryland’s gubernatorial pay is above the national average of $130,595
per year.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), federal wages are expected to
grow by 10 percent between 2010 and 2018. At the same time, governor salaries
dropped an average of 4 percent in 2010 with California leading the nation decreasing
its gubernatorial salary from $212,179 in 2009 to $173,987 in 2010. In 2009 before
the gubernatorial pay decrease, 709 federal employees in the state made more than the
governor. From 2009 to 2010, Florida decreased its gubernatorial salary by 2 percent,
and Hawaii decreased its gubernatorial salary by 5 percent. North Dakota, Iowa,
and Kentucky gave their governors raises, but they do not expect to grant any more
gubernatorial raises as state budget crises persist.

Almost a quarter of all federal employees earning more than the governor are medical
officers. Attorneys, engineers, program administrators, and air traffic controllers are the
other largest groups to earn more than state governors.

According to BLS, federal workers made an average of $74,403 in 2009, 30 to 40 percent
more than their private sector counterparts.

–

Originally published on the Founders Compass: http://www.thefounderscompass.com/uncategorized/its-time-to-cut-federal-payrolls/

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  He is the current media intern for a Wisconsin Tea Party net start up: the Founders Compass

The Dream Act is still hotly debated and some people demand that President Obama usurp his authority under the separation of powers to keep Dream Act eligible students in the country. 

The DREAM Act is still a bill, but the Latino advocacy group Presente is urging President Obama to pass an executive order to prevent the deportation of DREAM Act eligible students.  These calls came ahead of Obama’s June 14th visit to Puerto Rico and were voiced on a June 13th conference call. 

The DREAM Act is a bipartisan immigration bill proposed by Senators Orin Hatch (R-UT) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) which allows undocumented immigrants who have graduated from an American high school or received their GED and who have been on American soil from when they were 15 or younger to be granted Conditional Permanent Residency on the premise that they will complete either two years of college or two years of military service within six years of being granted Conditional Permanent Residency.  

Presente views the passage of the DREAM Act as a matter of human rights.  For Puerto Rican-Americans who see large numbers of illegal would be DREAM Act eligible immigrants immigrate to their island territory, presidential support of the Dream Act and a pre-emptive executive order is key to courting their votes.  Courting Puerto Rican voters was thought to be the main purpose of President Obama’s trip to the island.  But, can the President pass an executive order related to a law that has yet to pass? 

I asked the office of Repressentative Luis Gutierez (D-IL), a proponent of the DREAM Act and a panelist on the conference call: The DREAM Act has not been passed by Congress and is not a law.  How can the president halt deportations of people potentially eligible under a law that does not even exist? 

Representative Gutierez’s press secretary Doug Rivlin didn’t claim that Representative Gutierez was seeking an executive order.  “Not an executive order,” Rivlin said.  “The president has authority under existing law to exercise prosecutorial discretion to grant deferrals of various types to people who would be subject to deportation.  So we’re not talking about an executive order.  We’re talking about how the current law is applied.”

Nonetheless, central to Presente’s conference call and press release was undocumented immigrant to Puerto Rico (and recent high school graduate) Esmeralda Hidalgo’s pleas for an executive order.  Hidalgo is quoted in the press release saying “I need President Obama to pass an executive order to stop deportations of DREAM Act students like me until we have the DREAM Act.” 

Presente invokes an Immigration Policy Center memo to argue that a pre-emptive executive order to halt deportations is needed and within the president’s power.  The memo delves into prosecutorial discretion.  The government may choose to not deport undocumented residents on the basis of humanitarian factors or administrative convenience.

Kenneth Mayer, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin and an expert on the American presidency explains, “law enforcement is sort of the archetype of an executive power.  Congress passes a statue, and it is up to the executive branch to enforce a law.  I suppose it’s possible you could use an executive order to set out your policies on how you’re going to enforce immigration laws, but it would be very difficult to use an executive order to implement legislation that hasn’t been passed by congress.” 

When asked if the president would he be able to take a class of people who would be eligible [for the DREAM Act] and come up with a reason why they should stay or would it be suspect because it’s likely under the provisions of an un-passed law, Mayer responded:  “He could direct the INS or customs and immigration to not aggressively enforce.  He could not declare that everybody who has served in the military gets to go to college for in state tuition at an in state university.” 

Mayer went on to say that “it [the sought executive order] could be more symbolic than substantive.”

Presente argues that it would be inhumane to deny students illegally residing in the United States out of no fault of their own an education and an opportunity to stay in the country in which they have established roots.

Yet, discretion in deportation on the grounds of humanitarianism is usually pursued on the basis of it being “unsafe for foreign nationals to return home due to armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions,” according to the aforementioned memo.  The unavailability of an American education or the severing of a person from cultural ties made in the US after arriving illegally may not be substantial enough grounds for the government to not deport illegal residents. 

When asked on what administrative or humanitarian grounds an executive order to prevent the deportation of DREAM Act eligible illegals could be passed, Bryan Griffith, Spokesman for the  Center for Immigration Studies said, “they [DREAM Act students] are not going to have any more humanitarian grounds than any other individual illegal immigrant.  Probably, they’d have even less because theoretically these are folks who have high school degrees.”

Griffith went on to say “otherwise, I think that maybe it’s just sorta them [Presente] coming up with content for another press release.

Presente launched an ad in Puerto Rico to coincide with the President’s visit telling people to demand an executive order to stop the deportation of DREAMERs. 

 –

Originally published on the Founders Compass: http://www.thefounderscompass.com/uncategorized/dream-act-one-president-above-the-law-courting-democrat-votes-betraying-the-separation-of-powers/

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  He is the current media intern for a Wisconsin Tea Party net start up: the Founders Compass

The amendment, introduced Wednesday, failed to pass the House Appropriations Committee on a 26-18 vote, along party lines.

The amendment reads in part: “(N)one of the funds made available in this act may be used to obtain polystyrene products for use in food service facilities of the House.”

The push to ban Styrofoam follows comments Moran made last month at a rally held at George Mason University, on its Arlington, Va., campus, to protest the “corporate dominance of our democracy.”

Moran said the House of Representatives was forcing the government to purchase Styrofoam cups, which he said were not environmentally sustainable, and which were produced by Koch Industries, a company headed by two brothers who support a variety of conservative causes.

“As soon as the Republicans took over the House of Representatives, they threw out all of the biodegradable utensils we were using in the cafeterias and they required us to buy Styrofoam cups and plates and so on that are manufactured by Dixie and, in fact, this is part of Koch Industries,” Moran said.  

Despite Moran’s assertions that the move to Styrofoam was mandated by House Republicans and was a parlay to Koch Industries, the move to Styrofoam was decided upon by the House cafeterias themselves, and the Styrofoam used in House dining facilities is not even made by Koch Industries.

The House cafeterias, which are operated by Restaurant Associates, utilize WinCup as their supplier. WinCup is a leading manufacturer of foam disposable cups, bowls, containers and lids. It is not owned by Koch Industries and is a competitor for Dixie.

When the 112th Congress took office in January, House Administration Committee Chairman Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) ended the Green Capitol Initiative, under which corn-based, biodegradable utensils were used.

But the California Republican said in a news release that an inspector general’s report found that the $475,000 composting program – which had been implemented by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — had led to a negligible reduction in carbon but had actually increased energy consumption in the form of “additional energy for the pulping process and the increased hauling distance to the composting facility.”

“I would like to assure the House community that this committee will continue to evaluate all components of House operations and will work with the appropriate agencies to incorporate environmentally sustainable practices when feasible,” Lungren said in the statement.

—

Originally Published On CNSNews.Com: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-moran-fails-move-ban-styrofoam-house

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism.  During the summer of 2011, he interned as a reporter for CNS News, a division of the Media Research Center.

But as man caused climate change skeptic Patrick J. Michaels, Senior Fellow in Environmental Studies at the Cato Institute explains, the data isn’t flawed mathematically, it covers too narrow a period of time to conclude that human activity such as the release of greenhouse gases has created environmental peril.  Not only is the UCS misleading the public in characterizing the current warming trend as extraordinary, their linkage between the normal warming of the last fifty years and ozone levels is inaccurate.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, an organization that believes according to its website, http://www.ucsusa.org, “the Earth is warming and human activity is the primary cause,” explains that increased temperatures are a catalyst for the formation of ozone which according to the UCS report is at unhealthy levels in many American cities.  According to Dr. Jerome Paulson a pediatrician and director of the Mid-Atlantic Center for Children’s Health and the Environment at Children’s National Medical Center, the whole eastern third of the country and the entire southern tier fail to meet standards for ozone emissions.

Michaels commented that the UCS regional analyses are based on only a small number of measurement sites, and thus, they don’t reflect air quality for an entire region.

Communities and schools are starting to take account of ozone levels, canceling recess and outdoor activities when the air concentration is dangerous (at least 151 parts per billion), but for kids with asthma, lower concentrations can still be dangerous according to the report.

According to Joel Schwartz, former Visiting Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and Senior Consultant with the Blue Sky Consulting Group, ozone only accounts for 1 percent of all asthma exacerbations, so more cancellations of recess and other outdoor recreation may harm kids more than it helps.

“If [we] fail to act, American families will face increasing burdens in terms of respiratory illness, lost work days, school absences, and reduced productivity, said report co-author Sylvia Brandt, a resource economist professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

The Union of Concerned Scientists report includes the assumption temperatures are steadily rising, and the last decade was the hottest on record.  If such a trend were to continue, the generation of harmful ozone would grow as a public health threat.

According to Michaels, models used by the IPCC and other climate scientists over emphasize the 20^th century and only go back to the mid 19^th century.

According to the report, to combat the interaction of ozone precursors and warming requires personal lifestyle modification, regulation, and altered business practices to mitigate the greenhouse effect and levels of pollutants that contribute to ozone pollution.

I asked the  report authors : what can be done either on the business side or policy side to decrease the ground-level ozone accumulation?

Liz Perera,  Washington representative for Climate Change Policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists and report co-author responded, “A lot of our nation’s power plants emit large amounts of nitrogen oxide, and industry also releases volatile organic compounds [hydrocarbons that evaporate in the atmosphere including natural occurring biogenic compounds such as those released by vegetation] from different industrial processes.  In addition, many of us can take personal actions to reduce the amount of ozone forming pollutants that we contribute to.  Such as, we can take mass transit and ride our bikes instead of getting into cars and trucks to get around.  We can take the train.  In addition, things like mowing your lawn on days of high ozone are not a good idea.”

According to Schwartz, the UCS may have mischaracterized how pollutants nitrogen oxide and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) contribute to ozone pollution.  Schwartz confirmed that both nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds are precursors to ozone, and heat, especially during the summer months, does cause ground-level ozone to rise.  Yet, nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds are not a one or the other situation when it comes to levels of ozone pollution.  When there is a balance in nitrogen oxide and VOC levels, ozone levels are lower.

According to the report, current efforts to reduce ozone precursors are hampered by current climate change projections which exacerbate the formation of ozone.  Temperatures are set to rise by 2020 by at least O.1 degrees Celsius.  The authors say EPA clean air standards aimed to decrease the number of released pollutants fail to keep pace with increases in temperature causing pollutants to coalesce as Ozone at a rate certain to affect public health.

UCS portrays cities as culpable for rising ozone levels, but cities tend to be more balanced in their nitrogen oxide to VOC levels due to human reliance on fossil fuels and the associated release of nitrogen oxides compared to suburban and rural areas that tend to have unbalanced levels of VOCs.

Currently, the EPA allows ozone levels to be 75 parts per billion (ppb).  In July the EPA is set to amend permitted levels to somewhere between 60 and 70 ppb.  The World Health Organization ozone guideline is 50 ppb.

According to Joel Schwartz, ever the more stringent EPA standards on ozone have pushed ozone concentrations to well below healthy maximums.  Not only did Schwartz characterize the current standards as less than natural background levels in some cities, he called the WHO guideline that the UCS report authors cite as reason to lower American emission standards as “very low.”

According to the UCS report, excess ozone is particularly harmful to the young and elderly populations.  An average of 3700 more elderly and 1400 more infants could be hospitalized per year for respiratory illnesses by the year 2020 due to ozone pollution.  Youth are especially vulnerable to the effects of ozone because they inhale more air per unit of body weight allowing a higher concentration in their body to singe lung tissue.  Once these children reach adulthood, their lungs naturally lose function.  As they age, they will have less reserve capacity and may be more susceptible to diseases like emphysema according to Dr. Paulson.

Michaels confirmed that ozone can contribute to respiratory irritation, but to tie climate change of the last 50 years to an increase in pollution and pollution inspired disease is inaccurate.  Partially due to stricter government standards, levels of pollution across the country have decreased at the same time diseases like asthma in children have become more prevalent.

The Union of Concerned Scientists believes that regulation and lifestyle adjustment can stymie the rise in ground-level ozone by 2050, yet ground-level ozone is already on the decline.

Efforts to limit ozone levels today follow efforts in the past to combat ozone depletion caused by CFCs, a component of coolants and aerosols.

I asked Brian Sussman, a meteorologist, radio talk show host at KSFO 560 AM in San Francisco, and the author of Climategate, isn’t it ironic that the government spent money to combat ozone depletion, but they are now worried that ozone levels are too high?

Sussman responded that “from 1980 to 2005, ground level ozone fell 20 percent.  In that same period, 1980 to 2005, population increased.  Cars on the road increased.  Trucks on the road increased.  Plane flying increased, and yet, we saw ozone levels decline 20 percent.

Sussman said, “[they] use pollution to demonize capitalism.”

It is important to note that upper level ozone is vital to the reflection of solar radiation which is different than ozone in the air we breath, which is a pulmonary irritant.

According to the UCS report, ozone levels are expected to keep children out of school for related illnesses an extra 944,000 days in 2020.  Currently, 18 percent of families with asthmatic children have had a parent laid off or quit in order to take care of a symptomatic child.  This results in lost earnings and lower potential future earnings.  In 2020, costs stemming directly and indirectly from ozone related health concerns could reach 5.4 billion dollars (2008 dollars) according to the UCS report.

Respiratory illness certainly has public health and economic ramifications, yet with ozone levels declining, the impact of ground-level ozone pollution specifically on public health and the economy may be over stated.

The UCS is right in its claim that heat is a catalyst for the synthesis of VOCs and nitrogen oxides into ozone, and it is correct in that ozone is a respiratory irritant.  Nonetheless, the drop in pollution levels and the normalcy of current climate change shows that the ozone pollution crisis and the climate change crisis that underpins the UCS’s argument both are inflated to influence EPA regulations and inspire unnecessary changes to the American lifestyle.

–

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism interested in grassroots, advocacy, policy, and media relations.

One of the most infamous and illusive terrorists, Anwar al-Awlaki, exemplifies the toxic marriage of the internet and the sentiments of the Jihadist fringe.

Awlaki is a dual citizen of America and Yemen.  He was an Imam who had a following among and relationship with some of the 9/11 hijackers.  The Fort Hood gunman was also known to follow Awlaki’s sermons.  Awlaki has publicly praised suicide bombers, and in 2002, he was investigated for sending money to terror suspects subsequently being placed on the federal terror watch list.  A warrant for Awlaki’s arrest was issued in 2002 for passport fraud.  Awlaki was arrested at JFK Airport in October of 2002, but a FBI agent later ordered Awlaki’s release.  Awlaki is known to post online lectures which some deem a recruiting tool for Jihad.  Awlaki’s technological savvy and command of English make him a powerful recruiter of Muslims in America and the United Kingdom.  President Barack Obama placed Awlaki on the CIA Target list to be killed in 2010 with encouragement from the National Security Council.  Awlaki is currently a regional commander with Al Qaeda.

Catherine Herridge, a national correspondent at Fox News, explores the future of American terror prevention, the history of the problem, and practitioners of terror  who use the web to recruit fellow terrorists thus defy common notions of radical Islam in her book The Next Wave which she discussed at a forum hosted by the Heritage Foundation June 28^th.

As Herridge says, “the American in Yemen is really the leader of a new generation.  I call it Al Qaeda 2.0, and these people are digital Jihadists.  They’re people who lived here or were born here and know how to use our technology against us.”

Where he is today is really not much of a surprise.  It’s not a surprise at all.

Terror sentiments and web based recruitment have proven themselves to be a touchy subject with many public officials.

“When I wrote that part of the book about the Pentagon lunch, it really made me feel a little sick because his (Awlaki) contacts were with three of the five guys who hit that building.  So here is a guy part of an outreach to moderate Muslims, and he’s a guest speaker on Islam in an executive dining room in a building his guys tried to destroy.  It’s like a thief returning to the scene of a crime.”

With nobody examining people, like American born Awlaki, who become involved in terrorism, American born radicals are overlooked and deemed part of the moderate Muslim majority.  If we fail to acknowledge America as a terror recruitment ground and the web as a recruitment conduit, the American born terrorist may become ubiquitous.    This ignorance is playing to Al Qaeda’s hand.

“Back in 2006 and 2007, Al Qaeda decided to try and recruit westerners and American citizens because  they saw we were very focused on people from the Middle East and from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and they understood that it would be harder to put our own people under the microscope because of the protections American citizens have.”

In dealing with the modern terror threat presented by Al Qaeda 2.0, Herridge comments that we may have to live with a threat of terror as terrorists plot and recruit on the web.   Herridge talks about a discussion with a former CIA Director which she includes in her book. “To have perfect security or to really reduce the risk we’re going to have to give up a lot of our privileges as Americans so to speak.  We’re going to have the government more and in our business.  And he said I don’t think we want to go there.  I think we need to say to people we’re going to have a certain amount of risk and some things are going to get through.  But that’s kinda the price we have to pay in order to maintain the way that we live ant the freedoms that we value because one of the goals of these groups is to force us to dramatically change the way we live and give up the freedoms that make us different than other countries.”

With American born terrorists like Awlaki and Jihad Jane reaching the public’s awareness, some question how Americans can be radicalized to join in radical jihad.

Herridge explains, “they get on the web and into chat rooms with very like minded people.  If you think the moon is made of green cheese and the five people you’re dealing with on the web all feel the same way too.  Pretty soon everyone else in the world is wrong.  So there is kinda this revving up that you see.  The message on the web is very insidious…He ( Awlaki) is really good.  He is really smooth and really smart, and he really understands propaganda and how to speak to Americans.”

Herridge went on to say “I think the misconception is that this guy is recruiting people.  He’s not reaching out and tapping people.  They’re reaching up and grabbing for him.”

“This guy successfully breaks down the American cultural identity for these people and makes them feel like victims and that this is justified.  That it really is an attack on them.”

When asked do you believe a congressional or internal department investigation into the mishandling of Awlaki is warranted?  Herridge responded, “I would like to see some congressional hearings.”

Herridge cites a letter written by Representative Frank Wolf (R-VA) to the Director of the FBI requesting answers on the 2002 arrest and release of Awlaki allowing him to further involve himself in terrorism

Herridge went on to say, “I think we want to have an answer to this not because we are trying to blame somebody nine years after the fact.  I think we need to understand what went wrong, so we don’t repeat it again.”

–

Jerad McHenry is a senior at the University of Wisconsin-Madison studying political science and journalism interested in grassroots, advocacy, policy, and media relations.