While Americans are focused on the implementation of ObamaCare and the battle of the budget, the House is preparing to vote on an amendment offered by Rep. Ben Lujan (D-NM) that is a dry-run to kill the Keystone Pipeline and other economic development projects across the nation.

The House is scheduled to consider a non-controversial land-swap deal in Arizona. Liberal Rep. Ben Lujan (D-NM) is preparing an amendment that would give the Secretary of the Department of Interior the power to designate the site a Native American "cultural site" killing the project in its tracks.  The amendment is a dream for radical environmentalists who could use the amendment as a precedent to kill other developmental projects like Keystone Pipeline.

Supporters of the Lujan Amendment define "cultural sites" as anywhere where our original inhabitants' lived, prayed and worshiped would be barred from new development. 

Some Republicans are supporting the amendment perhaps not recognizing its a camel's nose under the net.  If this precedent is applied in the future it would have a destructive impact it would have on road construction, home building, land swaps, or even the development of the Keystone Pipeline.  

The amendment would give environmentalists another tool in their arsenal to stop development of any project they do not support.  Worse yet, there is little doubt, courthouses across the nation would be flooded with lawsuits from the radical environmentalists demanding "cultural site" designations anywhere and everywhere construction is proposed.

Contractors, road builders, pipelayers, and construction unions should be up in arms over the amendment but no one seems to realize its potential impact.   One government official should not have the power to stop economic development across the nation.  But if the Lujan amendment does become law, the Secretary of Interior would have that power.  Overnight he would become one of the most powerful government officials in the nation.  The Lujan amendment must be defeated.

Congress is poised to renew the Import-Export Bank and while Delta Airlines is lining up their lobbyists to oppose the reauthorization they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar.  

Flight Global reports that Delta Air Lines has received export credit financing from Export Development Canada (EDC) for its order of up to 70 Bombardier CRJ900s, even as it opposes similar support from the Export-Import Bank of the US (US Ex-Im) to certain foreign carriers.

EDC agreed to provide between Canadian dollars (C$) 500 million ($484.4 million) and C$1 billion in financing for the order, under an agreement that was signed in December 2012 and disclosed by the export credit agency (ECA).

Atlanta-based Delta ordered 40 firm CRJ900s with options for another 30 aircraft the same month. At list prices, the firm order is worth $1.85 billion and the entire order $3.29 billion.

Delta-subsidiary Endeavor Air took delivery of the first aircraft on 29 August and will have 12 in its fleet by the end of the year, Flightglobal’s Ascend Online database shows. The regional carrier already operates 41 CRJ900s.

EDC declines to comment on the structure or tenor of the financing.

Delta’s use of export credit comes as it opposes similar financing to certain foreign competitors. The carrier filed a lawsuit with Hawaiian Airlines and the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) against US Ex-Im in April claiming negative economic consequences of the ECA’s loan guarantees for widebody aircraft.

“It's really investment grade companies that are owned by the government where the president of the country, the chairman of the board and the president of the airline are one in the same,” said Richard Anderson, chief executive of Delta, in a May speech.

While Delta is not government-owned, it is rated near investment grade and capable of securing competitively priced debt on commercial markets. It rejoined the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 index on 10 September after being dropped in 2005 and maintains B+, B1 and B+ ratings from rating agencies Fitch Ratings, Moody’s and S&P.

In addition, Delta’s claim of negative economic consequences stems from its having to compete with foreign carriers, such as Emirates, Etihad Airways and Korean Air, that benefit from US Ex-Im loan guarantees.

Air Canada could make a similar argument towards Delta’s use of EDC financing. The carriers compete on routes between Canada and the USA, including between Atlanta and Toronto Pearson where Delta flies CRJ900s as well as other Bombardier aircraft, according to Innovata FlightMaps Analytics.

American Airlines acknowledges some form of double standard between Delta’s claims and actions. Will Ris, senior vice-president of government and regulatory affairs at the Fort Worth, Texas-based carrier, told Flightglobal that American does not take a position on US Ex-Im financing to foreign carriers as it uses export credit itself, at an event in Washington DC on 24 September.

The airline has used financing Brazilian development bank BNDES for the Embraer regional jet fleet at its subsidiary American Eagle Airlines.

Delta did not immediately comment on its use of EDC financing while objecting to US Ex-Im guarantees.

Conservatives are rejoicing at the Senate’s rejection of President Obama’s anti-Second Amendment gun control agenda.  For the first time since many can remember, the GOP conference held together and voted on principle to oppose a liberal power grab.  There were, of course, a few defectors, including Sen. John McCain, as can be expected.  But the leadership held firm and members fell into place.

There are three senators who deserves our accolades for understanding the intricacies of legislative strategy.  It was their strategy and their willingness to lay their bodies on the train tracks that fostered victory. 

Sens. Paul, Cruz and Lee followed the golden rule of political opposition — make your opponents crawl over glass to achieve victory.  By filibustering the motion to proceed to gun control — even in light of opposition from the normally reliable Wall Street Journal — the Senators got a roll call vote of senators before the gun control bill came to the floor.  This gave grassroots activists a target list of potential defectors.  Word from Capitol Hill is that the 16 Republican Senators who voted to allow gun control to come to the floor came under withering fire from gun owners and conservatives.  Talk radio hosts like Mark Levin and others turned up the heat.  The pressure was enough to turn potential defectors into strong supporters of the Second Amendment.  By using every legislative tool at their disposal, Paul, Lee and Cruz, we able to galvanize conservative support for their position.  It has been a generation since conservatives had leaders willing to make such sacrifices.  Here’s hoping that victory breeds a crowd. 

Virginia Republican governor Bob McDonnell stuck the knives in the back of conservatives by pushing a massive tax hike scheme.  

Working with the Republican Speaker of the House William J. Howell and Democrat gubernatorial hopeful and Clinton bagman Terry McAuliffe, McDonnell raised state sales taxes, car taxes, regional sales taxes, personal property taxes, vehicle taxes, vending machine taxes, heavy-equipment taxes, commercial taxes, hybrid-vehicle taxes, hotel taxes and diesel-fuel taxes.

Howell is not one to take dissent likely and he will stop at nothing to enact his agenda.  Luckily for Tea Party supporters and conservative activists, there are a handful of delegates willing to say no to Howell -- and McDonnell's -- big government tax and spend programs.

Del. Ben Cline (R-Rockbridge County) is becoming the leader of the conservative opposition. Cline not only opposed the tax hikes, he is doing something about it.  He has formed the Virginia Conservative Victory Project. The group “endorse and help fund conservative candidates running for vacant seats in the Virginia House of Delegates and conservative House incumbents running for re-election this November.”

“It is clear that conservatives must increase their numbers in the House of Delegates,” said Cline, who was among 40 House members who voted against the tax-raising transportation bill that passed the General Assembly in February.

“The 2013 General Assembly session was a disappointment for conservatives,” Cline said. “Through the recruitment of conservative candidates for House vacancies and the support of conservative House incumbents for re-election, the Virginia Conservative Victory Project will promote policies that embrace free markets, individual liberty, and the values of faith and family.”

Tea Party activists in Virginia should rally around the opposition -- and our new leader -- Ben Cline. 

In an effort to promote his cause for federal regulation of video games, Rep. Frank Wolf of the House Appropriations Committee, has demanded a federal agency that he oversees funding for conduct a study linking video games to violence.

At a hearing on Capitol Hill, Wolf brought the author of the study, Dr. Brad Bushman, to testify about his findings.  Bushman has previously authored a study linking Bible passages to violence.

“People who believe that God sanctions violence are more likely than others to behave aggressively themselves,” wrote Ohio State University Prof. Brad J. Bushman, in his study “When God Sanctions Killing: Effect of scriptural violence on aggression.”  "We found compelling evidence that exposure to a scriptural depiction of violence or to violence authorized by deity can cause readers to behave more aggressively,” he wrote. “Even among our participants who were not religiously devout, exposure to God-sanctioned violence increased subsequent aggression.  That the effect was found in such a sample may attest to the insidious power of exposure to literary scriptural violence,” he wrote in the study.

Naturally, Bushman also believes there is a link between video games and violence.  Bushman was a perfect researcher for a federal agency -- the National Science Foundation -- to call before a chairman who believes in video game regulations and determines their future funding allocations.

The reality is that since the growth of the video game industry in the 1990s, violence in America has dropped steeply and quickly.  Numerous authorities, including the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Surgeon General and Federal Communications Commission have examined the scientific record and found that it does not establish any causal link between violent programming and violent behavior. 

Naturally, Rep. Wolf believes his efforts are part of a "three-legged stool" to reduce violence in America -- and gun control is part of the other two legs of the stool.  But Bushman and Wolf are walking down a slippery slope.  If the Bible or video games cause violence, why not music, the Internet, books and movies?  The last thing we need is another government agency determined to censor the First Amendment rights of Americans. Unfortunately for Virginia voters, Rep. Wolf is proving himself to be a RINO.

If there was one billionaire more excited than George Soros at President Obama's re-election, it was Elon Musk.

The South African born Musk has been a triple recipient of Obama's "green" government investment schemes and the president's re-election appears to keep the taxpayer spigots open for the crony capitalist.

Musk is a three-time winner in the Obama taxpayer giveaways to his cronies and campaign contributors. 

Musk's Tesla Motors turned a $465 million loan guarantee from the Department of Energy into a $600 million personal windfall in profits when the company went public.  Musk used the loan to lobby Congress for more largess, spending $480,000 from 2007 to 2011 on lobbying Congress, the White House, EPA and DOE on climate and energy issues, the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing loan program, the Promoting Electric Vehicles Act, and the Recovery Act.

After giving thousands of dollars to the President and the political parties, Musk's company Space-X won $440 million in grants from NASA to design the next American spacecraft capable of launching humans into space.

Refusing to quit while he is ahead, Musk has entered the failing solar space.  SolarCity, another of Musk's companies living of the taxpayers, has filed for an IPO as Musk tries to replicate his get rich scheme.  But recent filings appear to put a bump in the road for SolarCity. 

The company, which awarded the company a $275 million loan guarantee, received a subpoena in July from the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Treasury to determine whether the company was part of a scam to inaccurately stated the fair-market value of their PV systems when applying for funds under the Treasury's Section 1603 cash-grant program.

In addition to fleecing the taxpayers to pad his wallet, it appears that Musk's Tesla Motors is also coming under scrutiny. Tesla's own SEC reports that the battery could be unsafe and catch on fire.

The green industry is a racket that hurts taxpayers and makes Obama's cronies rich.  Unless Congress acts, we will likely endure another four years of bailouts, handouts and giveaways to the president's supporters.

It's time for conservatives to demand separation of business and state and it should start with Elon Musk. 

During a recent debate, radical Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown told Ohio coal miners who have suffered under the wrath of Obama's destruction of the US coal industry, "There is no 'War on Coal', period."

Ohio coal miners have rightfully struck back.  Let's help the miners reclaim their jobs and dignity from those who would throw them on the ash heap of history.  Help spread the word.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgPkQYc0O5k&feature=youtu.be

500 coal miners in Eastern Ohio blasted President Obama and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) demanding they stop the "absolute lies" and "false ads" they are running that claim to champion the cause of coal.

The Wheeling News and Intelligencer reports:

Coal miners at the American Energy Corp. Century Mine said they want President Barack Obama to stop what they term "the war on coal" - and to stop spreading "mistruths" about them.

Miners gathered Friday afternoon to express their opposition to Obama's energy and environmental policies, which they believe threaten their jobs. Miner Mitch Miracle read aloud a letter the miners mailed to Obama that outlines some of their concerns.

The miners said Obama's campaign team is running ads filled with "blatantly false" statements about the miners regarding their participation in Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's August campaign stop at the Century Mine. These ads assert that the miners were forced to attend the event by the mine's owner, Robert Murray.

"There are numerous false statements and absolute lies concerning our participation in this event, mostly started by a local 'shock jock' radio host," the miners' letter to Obama states. "Why would you (Obama) lie about the 500 working miners who have signed this letter? We, the employees of the Century Mine would request you immediately stop these false ads."

This summer, Murray Energy Corp., parent company of the Beallsville mine, cut or relocated 56 workers with the closure of the Red Bird West mine near Brilliant. Murray also cut 29 mining jobs from The Ohio Valley Coal Co.'s Powhatan No. 6 Mine. All of this was done, Robert Murray said, because of Obama's "war on coal."

Murray then hosted the Romney campaign stop in Beallsville in August, during which many miners appeared behind Romney as the former Massachusetts governor spoke about the need to protect coal mining jobs. In response to the assertion some have made about the miners being forced to appear with Romney, the miners made several points on Friday:

- No employee was forced to attend the event.

- There were no attendance records taken for hourly employees.

- There were absolutely no penalties or reprimands to those who did not attend.

- Due to security concerns for the Romney campaign, there was a list for transportation purposes.

- They were "honored" to host Romney at the mine.

As for anyone who claims the miners were forced to attend, those on-site Friday said these assertions probably came from "discharged or disgruntled former employees."

Much is at stake this November but perhaps no more so than the coal miners across the nation whose jobs and lives are at risk from a president that promised to bankrupt the companies they work for.   

Most congressional observers believe Congress will address the issue of empowering states to collect sales tax on the purchases of goods bought on the Internet.  The issue is not typical of other tax issues as it finds conservatives like Steve King (R-Iowa), Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and others supporting the states ability to collect their sales taxes for online purchases.  A strong argument can be made that they have embraced the conservative position.

Make no mistake about it; there is deep division about this issue.  Mom-and-pop small businesses hate the disparity that was created when the Supreme Court ruled that businesses needed a "nexus" within a state for sales taxes to be collected.  That ruling allowed companies like Amazon to avoid sales taxes while small business are forced to collect them.  They argue that the decision, especially in a poor economy, creates economic incentives that hurt their bottom line.  Why should consumers shop in more expensive local stores when shopping online creates built-in no sales tax savings?

Others argue that allowing states to collect sales taxes for Internet purchases is tantamount to a tax increase.  As opponents have noted, America's budget problems are not revenue problems but spending problems.  Government's bring in enough revenue but can't get their spending in control. 

There is tacit acknowledgement of this argument as many supporters of the "Marketplace Equity Act" are governors who are struggling to balance their state budgets.  Billions of dollars in sales are made every year online that have escaped the reaches of the state tax collectors. 

But there is a bigger issue at stake -- federalism.

Allowing online merchants to charge, collect and remit sales taxes based on their physical location would level the playing field with Main Street small businesses and, perhaps most importantly, restore federalism to the issue.  The government should treat merchants equally.  It should not be making it harder for small businesses to compete.  In addition, the federal government should not bar states from enforcing their laws as long as they don't interfere with interstate commerce.

In some ways this is a complicated issue.  But in others it's clear that fairness and federalism should play a role in the final deliberations.   

President Obama's recent attack on the free enterprise system, small business and the entrepreneurial spirit of America, stands in sharp comparison to that of another president -- Ronald Reagan.  Even Obama's response to the attacks on his "if you've got a business -- you didn't build that.  Somebody else made that happen," comments demonstrates a shocking ignorance about the free market system.

Obama finally responded to the relentless attacks of his opponent Mitt Romney with an ad claiming his words were taken "out of context."  Of course, that is nonsense.  But his response provides a further glimpse into the anti-market mindset of the 44th president.

Obama promised that he would stand by small business by "Investing in education and training, roads and bridges, research and technology."  In other words, Obama believes that he can stand by business by spending more tax dollars on more programs. 

Even on his own TV ads he can't feign support for the free enterprise system.

This stands in sharp contrast to Ronald Reagan who throughout his political career would defend, inspire and promote freedom.  We should never forget Reagan's inspiring words: 

“We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefiting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people. This is the one irrefutable lesson of the entire postwar period contradicting the notion that rigid government controls are essential to economic development.”

"The government's view of the economy can be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

"Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last."

"The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing."

These are just a sampling of the words of a man who understood that freedom rests upon a pillar of free enterprise.  One day, hopefully in the not to distant future, we will have a president who shares that view.  America does not have the luxury of time to wait for such a day.

Since the birth of the Tea Party, we have had great success if replacing liberal, establishment Republicans with Tea Party conservatives.  When Mike Lee defeated "Bailout Bob" Bennett, we sent a shot across the bow of the RINO Republicans.  

This year Richard Mourdock defeated 36 year incumbent Dick Lugar and soon, in Texas, Ted Cruz can send more shockwaves through the establishment by beating insider David Dewhurst in the Republican primary.  But those aren't the only battles.

In Florida, redistricting placed two incumbents John Mica and Tea Party freshman Sandy Adams in the same district.  Mica is a career politician who has now been caught with his hands in cookie jar.

Since his election to Congress 20 years ago, Mica has become a world traveler -- on the taxpayer dime.  

Adams estimates that Mica's trips to countries like Malaysia, Italy and France have cost taxpayers in excess of $4 million.  Adams spokesman Lisa Boothe said, "John Mica’s decision to put his international travel bucket list ahead of Central Florida taxpayers is appalling.  While Mica has been attempting to pull the wool over voters’ eyes by denying his long history of runaway spending and record-setting earmarks, his 20 years in Congress tell a different story.  On top of adding $10 trillion to our nation’s debt and requesting $4 billion in earmarks, Mica has been earning frequent flyer miles on the backs of hard-working Americans.  At a time when Central Florida families and small businesses are struggling to pay their bills, how can Mica justify jet setting on their dime to some of the world's most popular international travel destinations?”

Conservatives and Tea Party activists in Florida's 7th district have an easy choice to make this August 14th in the GOP primary.  They can continue the Tea Party revolution by going with Sandy Adams or they can reward a RINO for his earmarks, K-Street connections and extensive taxpayer travel.  The choice is ours.  

News that the Department of Health and Human Services was promulgating a rule that would destroy about 35% of the Health Savings Account market comes as no surprise to Tea Party activists who warned everyone who would listen that ObamaCare would kill the private insurance market.

The rule known as the "Medical Loss Ratio" rule would deny private and small business issued policies from being sold on the ObamaCare health care exchanges.  There are currently five million people who have small business and individual issued policies. Those policies will be ripped from their hands should the rule go into effect.

HHS does not seem to care that the rule will be directly violate President Obama's promise that "[I]f you like your health plan, you'll keep your health plan."   They also don't seem to care that their edict will decimate the Health Savings Account market.

Since their creation in 2003, HSAs have become the fastest growing health care product in history.  14 million Americans enjoy their benefits.  They are, in fact, the real alternative to government-run health care.  They are a market-based product that encourages people to save money by shopping for health care services.  No wonder they are the first victims of ObamaCare.