The Sanchez Report

First Nuclear Reactor Since 1978 Just Approved

There is no doubt that the United States is facing an Energy Crisis. One could easily argue that our security interest in the Middle East is rooted in protecting our energy sources as much as it is fighting terrorism. For most of the past thirty or so years, the dividing line has been drawn between the Democrats who want to do away with fossil fuels entirely at all costs to our economy and the Republicans who want to find new energy sources closer to home. One source of energy that seems to be absent from the debate is nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is responsible for providing 20% of our nation's electrical needs. It is a clean energy whose technology has improved considerably from the last time a reactor was approved and constructed. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) just approved the construction of two new reactors in Georgia. This is progress people! The last time we built a reactor in this country was 1978. Yes, 1978! The population has grown and so has our need for electricity and the bureaucrats in Washington, along with the Environmental lobby has caved in and granted this approval. This is big news, but unfortunately we need 100 more by 2030 just to maintain the current 20% output. I hope the next President has the leadership and backbone to stand up to the tree hugging environmentalists and develop a real energy policy. Lord knows we need one!

From Scientific American:

Years of shifting and smoothing Georgia red clay paid off today, as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) voted to allow construction of two new nuclear reactors (pdf) at the Plant Vogtle nuclear power station near Augusta. Atlanta–based utility giant Southern Co. will soon have permission to complete construction and operate two AP1000 type nuclear reactors designed by Westinghouse.

But what were initially lauded as the first reactors of a nuclear renaissance when proposed are more likely to be the exceptions that prove the rule of no new nuclear construction in the U.S. Only this twin set of reactors in Georgia, another pair in South Carolina and the completion of an old reactor in Tennessee are likely to be built in the U.S. for at least the next decade. "We won't build large numbers of new nuclear plants in the U.S. in the near term," says Marvin Fertel, president of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a lobbying group for the nuclear industry.

Capitalism or Socialism... Where Do You Stand?

I found this gem on a blog run by a gentleman in India. I decided to share it with you. Now granted, the photo is a simplistic image that compares the two economic systems, but the questions are truly an eye opener. Go ahead and read them. I'm sure they will resonate in terms of how some of the left wingers want to run this country!

From Destiny's Child:

If a capitalist doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a socialist doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a capitalist is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a socialist is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a capitalist is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A socialist wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a capitalist doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Socialist demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a capitalist decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A socialist demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a capitalist reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A socialist will complain

MSNBC Liberal Panel Calls Romney Racist For Giving Cash To A Black Woman Asking For Help

Maybe I'm missing something, but since when is it a racist act to help out someone in need? A financially struggling African American woman sought out Mitt Romney's bus as it was passing through, looking for help, she approached Mitt Romney and he gladly handed her $50. On the surface this would seem like the right thing to do and be nothing more than an act of generosity, but no, that is considered an example of racism according to a panel of liberal commentators on MSNBC. I guess if you happen to be a white, conservative Republican, giving charity is akin to being racist because you somehow want to use that simple act as an example of a "dependent black person". The race card game is getting old!

From Real Clear Politics

 

The Ugly Reality of Obamacare and Socialized Medicine

I found this interesting article that reminded me why Obamacare and Socialized Medicine is bad. Once again, the American people have been led to believe that Obamacare is a wonderful thing that will provide free healthcare to all Americans. Not only will everyone be insured, but the cost of providing that care will come down. But wait, there's more, not only will we cover everyone at a lower cost, but it will pay for itself and will not add a dime to the national debt. On the surface this sounds great, except for the fact that it has been tried in many other countries before and there's plenty of evidence to prove otherwise. Read this gem of an article!

From Forbes:

The worldwide recession has forced countries around the world to curb public spending — or risk defaulting on their debt.

The United Kingdom is the latest to tighten its belt. The National Health Service (NHS) — the centralized public agency that runs Britain’s government healthcare system — is being forced to shave $31 billion from its budget by 2015.

These cuts are leading to a precipitous drop in the quality of care patients receive. The NHS has been living well beyond its means for quite awhile. And now brutal government-enforced cost controls are exacting a heavy human toll.

Thanks to Obamacare, America will soon face the same sort of reckoning.

Other nations with government-dominated healthcare systems offer a preview of the fiscal woes and substandard care that lie ahead thanks to the president’s spendthrift reform plan.

In order to realize some savings, the NHS is raising the threshold at which patients qualify for treatment and lengthening wait times for surgeries determined “non-lifesaving.” The Service is also cutting more than 20,000 NHS jobs over the next two years and shuttering a number of hospitals.

The British healthcare system may “guarantee” access to care — but that doesn’t mean patients actually receive it.

Read "The Ugly Realities of Socialized Medicine Are Not Going Away"

Jerry Brown's Tax Proposal Has Support? Yeah Right

According to the latest poll conducted by Public Policy Institute of California, we are to believe that 65% of Californians support raising taxes on the rich and raising the sales tax. What a crock! I don't care what this poll says, Californians have seen this game before. It's the same story although the sob story has some variations. The victim could be the Firemen, Police or Schools who will suffer if we don't give Sacramento more taxes. I say forget about raising taxes until after we reform the pension program for State workers and cut spending back to the levels seen in 2001. We don't need more revenue, we just need Sacramento to stand up to the Unions and cut spending. In real dollars, not the baseline cuts that politicians try to pass off to voters.

Obama Continues To Beat The Class Warfare Drum

The President has made it known loud and clear that his theme for reelection will be class warfare. So much for Hope and Change! He campaigned as a new politician. Someone who was going to change the tone in Washington. Instead, what we have is your typical liberal politician who can't explain why his socialists policies have failed. Never mind that these same policies, ideas and programs have failed everywhere else in the world. He'll go back to the same old tired Democratic playbook. You know how it goes. The rich are out to screw the poor and middle class. They only got wealthy by exploiting those under them. The rich need to pay their fair share. We need to raise taxes on the rich or else the poor will die and grow hungry. Public education will suffer and on and on and on!

From the great Larry Kudlow:

Following the GOP debate that nearly the whole world watched on Saturday night, the president on Sunday made it very clear that he will not back off his class-warfare vision in the coming year. Obama told Steve Kroft on 60 Minutes that middle-class inequality will be his big theme, and that somehow successful earners, investors, and small-business owners are to blame.

The president said that while fat-cat incomes went up 200 to 300 percent over the last few decades, middle-class incomes didn’t grow. This is not true, according to James Pethokoukis, whose blog posts citing various studies show that real median income rose at least 40 to 50 percent.

In any case, whatever the exact numbers, it’s still a mystery to me why successful people getting ahead cause anybody to fall behind. The Jack Kemp idea was always to foster a rising tide that would lift all boats. How can this happen if we penalize success and raise top tax rates on work and investment to 50 percent or more? That’s a mystery.

I should think, in a system of democratic capitalism, that more millionaires are a good thing. Show me a system of redistribution, and I’ll show you a system of economic stagnation.

Jerry Brown's Answer For California ... Higher Taxes

Last month I wrote about the current anti-business climate in California. For more than a decade, California has been in a free fall economically due to higher taxes, more costly regulations and an aggressive expansion of government spending and bureaucracy. Rather then elect new leaders with fresh ideas, last year Californians sent the 1970's washout, Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown back to Sacramento as Governor. In a classic case of not being able to teach an old dog new tricks, Jerry Brown has come up with a radical new approach to solving our state's problems. Wait, Wait, Wait for it... He's asking voters to approve the largest tax increase in California history. This proposal is being sold as a "tax on the rich and wealthy" in order to save our schools and infrastructure. Ladies and Gentlemen, we generate enough tax revenue in this state. The problem isn't taxes, it's too much spending. You know, the type of spending that provides cushy pensions to state employees, generous benefits and overtime thanks to the SEIU and other shake down unions.

When will Californians wise up and stop falling for the scam in Sacramento? When will voters begin to ask why our school test scores are low? Why are prison populations are so high? Why do we allow state employees to earn on average over $100,000 and retirement at age 55 with full salary?  When will voters begin to ask why we're falling behind other states with far lower tax rates in jobs, infrastructure and education? Raising taxes is not the answer. That's the same liberal solution for every problem. When have the liberals controlling Washington or Sacramento have EVER called for lower taxes and lower government spending/ NEVER. Wise up Californians. Stop falling for the same lie that's been told to us for decades. The poor will not suffer, the elderly will not die and children will not suffer if we begin to follow the path of other states that have figured it out.

Spain Rebukes European Socialism

Spain is the latest European country  to rebuke the failed European Socialist model. In a stunning turnaround for Conservatives, Spain elected Mario Rajoy and his conservative People's Party to take over control of parliament. This brings an end to the Socialists rule in Spain. The outgoing Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero took control in 2004 in a controversial election marred by a terrorist attack on a Madrid train station. This tragedy cause fear to spread throughout Spain and many voters elected the Socialists in hopes that it would prevent further attacks. The incumbent at the time was Jose Maria Aznar who along with Tony Blair served as George W. Bush's strongest European ally.

Spaniards have become fed up with policies that have nearly bankrupted their country. The far left Socialists are so unpopular that the current Prime Minister Zapatero decided not to run for reelection. The Socialists have spent like there is no tomorrow and taxed their way into an economic meltdown. In many ways, the Obama Administration has adopted the policies of Spain and it is for this reason that President Obama and his Democratic Party is headed for a landslide defeat in 2012. In this defeat, President Obama loses one of his strongest supporters in Europe.

From the Reuters article describing Spain's election:

Ana Maria Lopez, a 53-year-old chiropodist, poured scorn on the Socialists and said she intended to vote on Sunday.

"This government is the worst, everything it touches it destroys. I want a change, I'm fed up with this," she said.

"I'm self-employed, this government has never given anything to the self-employed they only want our money and our taxes."

I hope the White House and the Democrats pay close attention to the developments in Europe because this is indicative of what they can expect to see from the American people next year. Socialism has NEVER worked. The European Socialist model has failed and the love affair the the radical left and main stream media have with this utopian dream is finished.

 

California... The Anti-Business State

For many years, California conservatives have railed against the anti-business, tax and spend liberals and their stranglehold on Sacramento. For the most part, their words have fallen on deaf ears with voters. The liberal wing of the Democratic Party has essentially controlled both chambers of the State Capital, statewide offices and the Governorship for most of the past forty years. I know, I know, there were a few Republican Governors throughout those years and its no coincidence that the state was in better fiscal shape during their administrations. Need I remind you of Gray Davis's doubling of the budget in less than eight years? These wreckless policies have brought the Golden State to its knees. We are in big trouble and rather than moving towards a more hospitable climate for business, the Democrats are doing the opposite.

The Los Angeles Times yesterday published a sobering op-ed on the current toxic business climate in the Golden State. I would encourage you to read the entire article to get a sense of why a heavy regulation and high tax combination make it nearly impossible to create jobs.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Unless Sacramento moves to improve the business climate, California's reputation as one of the country's most toxic business environments will make it hard for the Golden State to regain its luster.

California's suffocating regulations have a lot to do with this discontent. A 2009 study by two California State University finance professors, Sanjay Varshney and Dennis Tootelian, estimated that regulation cost the state's businesses $493 billion annually, or nearly $135,000 per company. Additionally, dense and complex land-use regulations have driven up housing construction costs in the state, giving residents a double whammy: a stagnant economy and unaffordable home prices, even since the real estate bubble burst.

Taxes are another burden. According to the Tax Foundation, California imposes the nation's second-heaviest tax burden on businesses, and finance officers of major companies recently rated the state's overall tax environment the worst in the country, according to a poll in CFO magazine.

On top of taxes and regulation, the state can also claim what may be America's most expensive litigation environment for firms. The American Tort Reform Foundation recently named California one of the country's five worst "judicial hellholes," in part because state law allows trial lawyers to sue firms for minor violations of California's complex labor and environmental regulations.

The Supremes To Rule On Obamacare

The United States Supreme Court today announced that it will hear challenges to Obamacare. Twenty six states have followed Florida in challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate feature which requires that all Americans purchase health insurance.

This signature piece of legislation was pushed through Congress on a highly partisan vote and against the overwhelming opposition of the American people. This law has become known as Obamacare and is the President's watered down, some would even say backdoor version of universal healthcare. The type of healthcare that has plagued Canada, the UK and most of Europe.

The timing of this case will undoubtedly render a decision of monumental consequences next June at the height of the 2012 Presidential Campaign. The real question is, will Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself from this case? Keep in mind that she is the former Solicitor General of the United States, appointed by President Obama, who crafted the legal defense for Obamacare before her appointment to the Supreme Court. If there was ever a case that provided a conflict of interest, this is it. Let's see what the Democrats say given their insistence for months that Justice Clarence Thomas recuse himself because his wife has been involved with political groups that oppose Obamacare. This connection they say would prevent Justice Thomas from remaining impartial.

From Politico:

Seventy-four House Democrats are asking Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from any health care reform cases, citing reports that his wife financially benefited from efforts to repeal the legislation.

The members, led by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), ask that he “maintain the integrity of this court.”

“The appearance of a conflict of interest merits recusal under federal law. From what we have already seen, the line between your impartiality and you and your wife's financial stake in the overturn of healthcare reform is blurred,” the members wrote.

It looks like we have partisan double standards at work. At the end of the day, it's highly unlikely that Justice Kagan would recuse herself. Given her ultra liberal political views, she would never pass up an opportunity to ensure that the United States move towards the Socialists dream of universal healthcare coverage.