Reading Roundup

Good news, bad news — there is only a seven month inventory of bank owned residential properties in the Las Vegas, NV area.  The housing market appears to be leveling out in this region.  Good news for homeowners who’ve been waiting for their investment to appreciate, bad news for buyers.  [LV Sun] [RGJ]

Pure Fiction — the radical right rant in the RGJ on the 2nd Amendment which manages in a couple of short paragraphs to be almost fact free.  Best line? “The Second Amendment states the right to bear arms, not shotgun or long rifles. That means what it says, arms, tanks, machine guns and all other forms of arms so that the people would be on a parity with the government.”   May we ask, where in the city of Sparks do you intend to park your aircraft carrier?

Nevada Progressive discusses the Senate Judiciary committee hearings yesterday, complete with video of former Representative Gabby Giffords’ brief but poignant testimony.  ICYMI, Vegas Jessie looked at the NRA’s newly discovered interest in mental illness, as a distraction from the real issues.  TPM traces the new nullification efforts by radical conservatives.

Lady’s Day — Good reading at The Sin City Siren about the Feminist Files: If you aren’t outraged you aren’t paying attention.  Arkansas joins the ranks of Republican legislatures determined to keep women pregnant and in the kitchen.   And, then there’s Lawrence O’Donnell’s take down of the conservative lady who ardently believes that we should be defending our children with assault rifles.

Energy — Green tech firms, especially those seeking to increase our use of wind and solar power are seeking tax relief benefits from Congress, similar to those granted to the fossil fuel giants. [DealBook]  While the Chinese are gasping, the U.S. is learning that metal mining is responsible for 46% of “toxic releases” in our environment. [Earthworks] 15% is from power generation.

Unhealthy Ideas — a GOP legislator in our neighbor to the north (as in Idaho) compares the Affordable Care Act to the Holocaust — thus demonstrating she doesn’t understand either.   Meanwhile there’s the problem of the Unlucky Ducks and Medicaid.

Chart of the Day:

Once more we repeat with fervor: Austerity Doesn’t Create Prosperity.

Dim Bulbs vs. Economic Diversification in Nevada

It’s (sort of, kind of, maybe) official — Nevada has moved out of the Recession Line.  So sayeth the state’s chief economist.  Although, it’s not as if we can take a victory lap, wave the Battle Born flag, and ignore the problems around us.   The chief economist sees “national financial policy” issues (read: Cliffs & Hostages) and spiking gasoline prices as potential wet blankets at the recovery party.  Things are “looking good?”

“It became evident that we can’t rely on construction, leisure and hospitality to lead the way, and we’ve become more active in the economic development arena,” Anderson said. “We’re not seeing megaresorts popping out of the ground, yet more businesses are being attracted to come here. Nevada is well positioned to take advantage of the clean energy movement, wind and our geothermal resources in the north.”  [LVSun]

Yes, we are in a good position to take advantage of the clean energy movement, if there are any items of abundance in the Great Basin it’s wind, sun, and bubbling hot springs… However, that position may not improve much if the TeaParty/Republican led House of Representatives remains stuck in the 19th century, the following from June 16, 2012:

Republicans in the House of Representatives quietly passed 13 provisions last week that would choke off Energy Department financing for existing clean energy and efficiency programs.

The House adopted the amendments on June 6 as part of its 2013 Energy and Water Appropriations Bill. The proposed cuts reflect a broader trend. As the Tea Party reshapes the GOP, opposition to policies that reduce climate-changing gases and stoke the clean energy economy is soaring.

More than half of the targeted DOE programs were started under Pres. George W. Bush, while some go back decades. They range from wind technology supports to mandates for zero-carbon buildings, LED light bulbs and electric golf carts (and, of course, the controversial program behind the Solyndra loan).

Overall, the House energy bill would give $32.1 billion to energy and water programs, a cut of about $1 billion from Obama’s budget request. It would also shift more dollars to fossil-fuel programs. Research and development of “clean” coal, oil and natural gas technologies, for instance, would get a 60 percent boost from last year’s level to $554 million.

The House passed H.R. 5853, the Energy and Water Development Act with the following amendments, as issued by GOP leadership: (original pdf)

Cravaack (R-MN) #1 – The amendment would prohibit funding to require DoE grant recipients to upgrade their light bulbs to meet certain efficiency standards. This requirement is an inappropriate over-reach that puts an undue cost and regulatory burden on grant recipients. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Harris (R-MD) – The amendment prohibits funding for a DoE renewable energy and energy efficiency international program. The underlying bill already reduces the account by 60%, and the amendment would go further to ensure the elimination of wasteful or unnecessary overseas activities. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Burgess (R-TX) – The amendment prohibits funds from being used to implement or enforce energy efficiency standards regarding incandescent light bulbs and other incandescent light sources. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Stearns (R-FL) – The amendment prohibits funding for DoE to forgo certain U.S. rights in a loan guarantee agreement. This was one of the actions taken by DoE prior to the Solyndra bankruptcy, and it reduces the ability of the government to recoup taxpayer dollars. The amendment was adopted on a vote of 348-60.

Jordan (R-OH) – The amendment prohibits the use of funds to issue or administer new loan guarantees for renewable energy systems, electric power transmission systems, or leading edge biofuel projects. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Landry (R-LA) #2 – The amendment prohibits funding for a national media campaign on green technology. This activity is not part of the core mission of the agency. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Schweikert (R-AZ) – The amendment prohibits funding for DoE to implement or enforce regulations on shower heads or water-closets. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Fortenberry (R-NE) #2 – The amendment prohibits funding to implement or enforce a new DoE regulation that would impose energy efficiency standards on certain battery chargers. The regulation could place costly and unnecessary burdens on businesses, potentially costing American jobs and increasing prices for consumers. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Flores (R-TX) – The amendment prohibits funds to enforce the ban on the use of certain fuels by federal agencies. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Flake (R-AZ) #3 – The amendment prohibits DoE from using funds for the Wind Powering America Initiative. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.  (emphasis added)

The cat came out of the bag as the GOP House leadership explains to us that regulations promoting alternative energy use, energy conservation, and energy standards are “costly and unnecessary burdens on businesses, potentially costing American jobs and increasing prices for consumers.”   Note the grammatical but meaningful disconnect in the phrasing — “are costly (for business)” but “potentially costing … jobs.”  This is the classic Republican line — any nod toward improving energy efficiency standards or regulating energy conservation might cost some business some amount in the short term, and therefore must have a deleterious effect on hiring.   For some reason known but to themselves, the GOP seems obsessed by light bulbs, exemplary of the short term focus of Republican energy policy.

Dim Bulbs

Me’thinks the market has spoken.  Between 2001 and 2003 the number of CFL bulbs increased from 1.8 billion world wide to 3.5 billion.  There’s more:

“Reliable global data on CFL use since 2003 do not exist, but sales growth in individual countries strongly indicates that total usage continues to increase at a fast pace. Between 2000 and 2004, for example, estimated sales in the United States grew 343 percent-from 21 million to 93 million-and by 2007 they reached 397 million.  CFL sales in Western Europe grew 34 percent between 2000 and 2004, from 173 million to 232 million units, and in Eastern Europe they rose 143 percent, from 23 million to 56 million units.”  [WWatch]

One can only wonder WHY, if the sale of an item increased by 343% in four years, the Republicans haven’t caught on to the fact that consumers have decided that energy efficient bulbs are better home management decisions, and aren’t going to squawk too loudly if their government also decides that the old inefficient incandescent bulbs are the buggy whips of the 21st century.  The logic is about as perilous as advising citizens that they should revert to the use of chamber pots, thus enhancing the pottery and ceramic industry,  instead of those new-fangled WC’s that flush.   This “logic” also seems to have inspired now-Senator Flake’s notion that we don’t need to invest in the Wind Powering America Initiative — although Nevada, with a surfeit of blowing breezes, could definitely benefit from such a program.

So, while the chief economist for the state of Nevada hopes that clean energy investment and technology will augment the economic development of the state, the Republican members of Congress remain incandescent dim bulbs in that department.  We could use more economic diversification — but there isn’t much illumination coming from the House of Representatives.

Energy and Amodei

** Thus much for all the “Doom Despair and Agony On Me Deep Dark Depression and Excessive Misery“– Nevada’s unemployment rate has dropped to 11.8%.  [LVSun]  Not too shabby for a state that got caught in the midst of the Wall Street Casino generated Housing Bubble.

** There is an economic sector in which Nevada could do quite well:  “Nevada is rich in renewable energy potential but has few fossil energy resources. Nevada leads the Nation in geothermal power potential and much of the State is suitable for wind power development. The Colorado River, which forms Nevada’s southern border, is a powerful hydroelectric power resource.” [Eredux]  What could we be doing to create more jobs in the energy sector?

Wind Energy: “Over 24 million acres of land in Nevada within 10 miles of an existing transmission line is classified as ‘good’ to ‘outstanding’ for wind energy development. Nevada has the potential to generate 63 million megawatt/hours — 280% of the State’s current consumption.”

Solar Energy: “Nevada has the highest solar energy potential in the nation and is already the number one state in per capita solar energy production. The DOE estimates that 100 square miles of Nevada land could supply all U.S. electricity needs with current (~10%) commercial efficiency rates. With over 250 days of sunshine a year, Nevada is looking forward to a bright solar future.”

Geothermal Energy: “1500 MW of geothermal capacity that could come on line in Nevada by 2015. With 340 MW of geothermal power currently in operation and hundreds more coming on line in the next couple of years, Nevada is poised to become a world leader in geothermal power generation.”

UNR “Nevada’s Renewable Resources” Click for interactive maps and pdf reports.

**  The energy resources available for development in Nevada aren’t merely a matter of tree-huggin’ environmental interest — rural counties which need to diversify their economies are prime locations for energy development projects.   This ought to be a bi-partisan, if not non-partisan, issue.  Communities based on mining are all too familiar with the Boom and Bust phenomena — witness Hamilton,Belmont, or Bullfrog, and other ghosts of booms past.  Agriculture is a solid but geographically limited contributor to local rural economies.  Manufacturing clusters are developing, but face staffing challenges when competing with mining corporations for highly skilled employees.  Energy development is a sector which could contribute to rural economic development — the installations require construction (which would help in the short term), maintenance and staffing; better still they can’t be out-sourced to another country.

Instead of dismissing alternative energy development as a “passing fad,” which economists assure us isn’t the Chinese or German conclusion, or pretending that support for energy development is a futile exercise in picking winners and losers — could we guess that the Oil Giants believe they might be losers? — we should be looking at alternative energy development as a way to help diversify the economy in rural Nevada.

** And then there’s the short term vision of Nevada’s Second Congressional District incumbent.  Representative Mark Amodei’s view is remarkably foreshortened — as in limited to the next utility bill.

“If federal money is going to be spent on research and development to make wind, solar and geothermal energy more competitive that’s one issue, Amodei said.  “But if those, when they get done, go to sell into the grid and that increases rates, especially right now when things are they way they are in Nevada, and competition for sustainable living wage jobs is what it is in the Inter-mountain West, I think that’s the wrong energy policy,” he said. [NNB]

Somewhere in that word salad there’s a point which might be translated as  alternative energy development is OK if it is to make the projects competitive, and if there’s no increase in electricity bills.   The ultra-conservative NPRI chimes in with a misleading comment presented as if it proves alternative energy development doesn’t create jobs, and if it does it’s too expensive.  The NPRI took the total $1.3 billion investment in alternative energy since 2009, and divided it by the number of permanent full time jobs and came up with an astronomical price for each job created.

First, no one ever said alternative energy was going to create jobs for everyone in the country. Secondly, the NPRI’s complaint ignores the fact that the projects may also support those who are already employed in the industry — thus relieving downsizing pressures.  Third, construction jobs DO count.  Even though construction and installation jobs are by their very nature temporary, they do feed into the local economy, especially if local contractors and subcontractors are hired to do the work.

Economic diversification could be enhanced by including alternative energy projects, IF Representative Amodei were willing to take a longer view of the potential and less persistent in his opposition to anything that might require start up assistance.   It would be better for his rural constituents if he could even see past the envelop containing his power bill.

Solar Energy, Jobs, and Tribal Lands: A good combination

This is how it’s done:  “Solar Energy Project Approved on Tribal Land” [Las Vegas Sun] The Nevada based, 350 megawatt facility, is expected to generate 200 construction jobs and about 20 permanent jobs on site.

Solar and alternative energy sources have had a rough time in the House of Representatives, an amendment offered by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) to H.R. 1 ( 2011) sought to eliminate subsidies for solar energy research.  His amendment (H. Amdt 34) failed on a voice vote. [NYT] And, that was about the last good news.

Enter the Ryan Budget:

“Instead of ending Big Oil tax breaks, Rep. Ryan’s proposed FY 2013 budget would slash funding for investments in clean energy research, development, deployment, and commercialization, along with other energy programs. The plan calls for a $3 billion cut in energy programs in FY 2013 alone. From 2013 to 2017 the Ryan budget would spend a paltry total of $150 million over these five years on these programs—which is barely 20 percent of what was invested in only 2012. [AmProg]

The result? “If we followed this budget proposal, we’d be allowing fossil fuel companies, entrenched special interests, and their supporters in Congress to block our progress on clean energy and take our country in a direction Americans don’t want to go.”  [NRDC]  The differences between the parties are obvious, as pointed out by the Minority Committee Report:

In March 2012, House Republicans passed the Ryan budget resolution for FY2013, which included significant cuts to energy programs. No Democrats supported this measure.  The Ryan budget would reduce funding for energy programs by almost 50% by 2022.   In June 2012, the House passed H.R. 5325, an appropriations bill for 2013 that proposes to cut funding for clean energy and energy efficiency programs by more than $400 million, a 24% reduction from the previous year and 39% below the President’s request.  This House bill cuts funds for wind energy by 25%, solar energy by 46%, weatherization assistance by 20%, and building efficiency research and development by 43%.  House Republicans voted 207 to 29 in support of this bill.  [DemECHouse pdf]

Nevada Representatives Amodei (R-NV2) and Heck (R-NV3) voted in favor of the Ryan Budget on March 28, 2012. [roll call 140] Representative Berkley (D-NV1) voted against the Ryan Budget to cut energy programs by 50%.  All three members of the Nevada Congressional delegation voted against H.R. 5325 on June 6, 2012. [roll call 342]   H.R. 5325 passed on a 255-165 vote.

How many other solar projects will never be launched because of the House Republican allegiance to the provisions of the Ryan Budget and the attempt to gut funding for solar energy development in H.R. 5325?

GOP: Se Habla Anything?

** You have to love the consternation amongst anti-immigration factions in the U.S. and Nevada who “court” the Hispanic vote while calling for the “self-deportation” of undocumented persons.  The Nevada View notes:

Dean Heller has been trying real hard lately to massage his image with Hispanic voters in Nevada.  He wants Latinos to forget his long record of unfriendly rhetoric, votes against bills like the DREAM Act, and general disregard for the issues that matter most to their community.

Perhaps Senator Heller would like to explain his vote (#121) opposing the nomination of Maria Carmen Aponte to represent the U.S. as ambassador to the Republic of El Salvador?   The Republican filibuster of Aponte’s appointment was broken on a 61-37 Senate vote.   “Republicans had opposed Aponte over unfounded rumors that her boyfriend of years ago was a Cuban spy and over conservative outrage at an opinion piece she wrote last summer on gay rights. ” [Deseret News] (emphasis added)

Lest we consider the Hispanic community some sort of monolithic amalgam, Senator Heller’s opposition to Aponte’s appointment is a direct slap at Americans of Puerto Rican heritage.  The appointment also serves to increase the number of a traditionally under-recognized group: Hispanic women.  Aponte follows in the footsteps of Maria Luci Jamarillo, who served as ambassador to Honduras from 1977 to 1980. [USDip]

** Meanwhile back at the DREAM Act.  President Obama’s announcement of enforcement guidelines regarding children who were brought to this country by undocumented parents has candidate Romney on his back foot.   As of January 1, 2012 former Governor Romney was unequivocal:

Reporting from Des Moines — Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney has pledged to veto the so-called DREAM Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for children of illegal immigrants if they attend college or serve in the military. [LATimes]

That was before he was equivocal.   As of 36 hours ago the former Massachusetts governor was still dodging:

“But rather than flatly decrying the White House’s new policy as a reward for illegal behavior, as he did throughout the primaries, Romney has yet to explain what he’d do instead or even whether he’d even reverse Obama’s orders.”  [TPM]

It’s only June, so we have lots of time before Governor Romney invokes his best known position on all things: “I’m not familiar precisely with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said whatever it was.”  [TPM]

** The former Governor has had yet another Etch-A-Sketch moment on alternative energy.  Dismissing his record promoting alternative energy during his tenure in Massachusetts, the Governor has moved:

Today he is a proclaimed skeptic on global warming, a champion of oil and other fossil fuels, a critic of federal efforts to develop cleaner energy sources and a sworn enemy of the Environmental Protection Agency. [NYT]

This is a bit out of step with the efforts of the Las Vegas Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund which has invested in solar power to 20% of the power needed to operate the Water Pollution Control Facility in Las Vegas.  One official reported:

When the solar array project at the wastewater treatment plant is finished, the city will be up to nearly 5 megawatts of total solar energy installed across 28 city facilities and will provide up to 20 percent of the city’s peak energy demand, Perrigo said. “That will save the city anywhere from $800,000 to $1 million on its energy bill,” he said. [LV Sun]

Isn’t the idea to save tax dollars?  Current estimates project city power costs at $15 million per year.  Reducing total power costs by about 6.7% annually means better value for Las Vegas water and sewer customers.

** Governor Romney is on record supporting the repeal of the Dodd Frank Act, which may not make some small investors very comfortable.  The Facebook IPO story keeps moving along, and we’re now informed that Facebook and Morgan Stanley stuffed Facebook stock into small investors’ accounts while the “smart money ran for the hills.” [BusinessInsider]   Mike Mayo (analyst for Credit Agricole CLSA) has some blunt words for the bankers — fix your system or it will get fixed for you, “and rightly so.”   And, if we think the problems in money market funds (MMF) were all finished with the issues of the Reserve Primary Fund in September 2008,  please think again:

“In particular, MMFs can still take risks similar to those that destroyed the Reserve Primary Fund and triggered the damaging run in 2008: MMFs still use the same set of tools, including rounded NAVs, to maintain principal stability; and investors still have incentives to run at the first sign of trouble. Thus, the SEC’s current efforts to modify the structure of MMFs to reduce incentives to run may be essential not only for protecting MMF investors—especially retail investors—but also for protecting the stability of the U.S. financial system and maintaining the access of businesses, consumers, and governments to credit. In a future post, we intend to describe a proposal for improving the stability of MMFs by making them less vulnerable to runs.”  [LibertyStreet]

“Vulnerable” and “runs” are NOT two words a person wants to see in any discussion of money market funds.  Perhaps we can be reassured by Governor Romney’s position on de-regulation of financial markets: “I’m not familiar precisely with exactly what I said, but I stand by what I said whatever it was.”  [TPM]

OK, You Want To Talk About Solyndra?

OK, Karl Rove and his anonymous super-pac donors want to slam the Obama administration for “picking winners and losers” in the energy sector, and to do so by citing Solyndra and Evergreen.  First, there’s a little problem with the Evergreen part of the attack:

“But in 2002, three weeks into Governor Mitt Romney’s term, Evergreen Solar received $2.5 million from the Romney administration for a “major expansion and to cover operating losses as it tried to become profitable,” according to a February article in Politico. The investment was part of a broader program in which the Romney administration gave millions in subsidies to multiple other companies, Politico reported.” [WaPo]

Thus much for the “picking winners/losers” line.  And there’s a bit of an issue with the Solyndra example too, for those who don’t let ideology get in the way of their economics.   To summarize in entirely too few words, Solyndra had a very good product, but one which because of the nature of its design had limited use.  The company might have made it in a niche market for commercial rooftop installations, BUT …

“The Chinese government is investing in solar production, which has led to a burst in production that has boosted supplies and forced down product prices worldwide.  The price of panels has tumbled more than 40 percent in a year, Zweibel said, a drop that followed price declines in 2009.”  [NYT]

The Chinese were also doing a little something else:

“While some believe China benefits from lower labor costs, Arnold (Mitsubishi) said, “in fact much of manufacturing of solar modules is automated. Really the reason that countries like China are able to sell product at lower cost is they have cheaper access to capital,” because of government investments.” [NYT] (emphasis added)

That’s right. While the Americans were squabbling about whether or not to help capitalize solar energy component and system manufacturing, the Chinese government was pouring capital resources into their own sector.

Unsurprisingly, capitalism (or at least Who Had the Capital) worked; Chinese production soared and American companies with less capital available and parsimonious assistance from the government were left in the lurch.

But, all is not lost.  The attack ads forget to mention that there have been some winners in the American alternative energy sector.

The Coalition for American Solar Manufacturing lists 212 firms with 17,241 employees. [CASM]   Keeping 17,000 people off the unemployment rosters is fine, and we ought to note that First Solar has gotten some nice reviews by the stock pickers:

“While most of its competitors are losing money and have negative EPS numbers, First Solar is still profitable. At around 26 bucks a share, the stock has a current price to sales ratio of .83 and an expected year-over-year revenue growth rate north of 8%. Nearly all of its competitors have negative growth rates.

For fiscal year 2011, First solar reported negative GAAP earnings per share of ($0.45), but when accounting for write-offs and special charges, the company actually earned $6.00 per share. The resulting P/E ratio at this normalized earnings rate is around 5, giving it a very attractive .7 PEG ratio.

Finally, First Solar had sales in 2011 of $2.7 billion, surpassing most of its competitors. Only Suntech had higher sales volume at $3.1 billion. Furthermore, Suntech, along with LDK and Yingli, are Chinese companies that receive huge incentives from the government of that country. There are negotiations taking place between the U.S. and China to level the playing field by removing those subsidies, which can only benefit First Solar.”  [Seeking Alpha]

There are some reasons for concern in the solar energy sector, not the least of which includes European “austerity” measures which will mean lower subsidies for their installations.   Headwinds and all the corporate leaders of First Solar aren’t all that pleased with the Rovian castigation of them as losers:

“It’s surprising a candidate that claims to support U.S. economic growth would criticize a great American success story like First Solar,” said Ted Meyer, vice president of global corporate communications for the company, in a statement. “First Solar has proven that an American company can compete and win in renewable energy globally, and our success supports almost 10,000 American jobs, more than $1 billion in U.S. purchasing, tens of millions of dollars in exports, and record-setting innovation that reduces pollution and enhances U.S. energy security.” [Phoenix BizJournal]

The management of Ecotality wasn’t thrilled with the Rove ad either:

Officials with Ecotality said the ad presented a number inaccuracies with its operations, which has received numerous federal grants over the years particularly associated with electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Much of its work on that front is being done in Phoenix, where the company once had its headquarters and where it still houses its North American operations. [Phoenix BizJournal]

Getting down to specifics, the Rove ad shows a dramatic down arrow for First Solar stock, which isn’t quite the whole story — Now who would have thought that? Shares of First Solar have never dropped to $4.00.  “Shares of the solar company were trading Tuesday at $14.49, up 16 cents, or 1.1%, which is above both a 52-week and all-time low of $13.21. ” [TheStreet] Then, Seeking Alpha reported that some institutional fund and hedge fund manager weren’t seeing enough “growth” in semiconductor sector stocks and we see a bit of selling?  The stock is now selling at $12.60. [FSLR]

Not seeing “sufficient growth” and “going out of business” are two entirely different things.  Wall Street wants instant gratification.  Main Street needs, and will get, more affordable solar and alternative energy in the long run. There are millions of jobs to be created in alternative energy technologies, the question is Where Will They Be?  We can take the ‘day-trader’ Rovian view that that which doesn’t bestow instant gratification for players in the stock markets isn’t really part of our overall economic policy, and it’s OK for the manufacturing jobs to be created in China — or, we can take a longer view that (1) the alternative energy sector is a future source of energy independence and economic advancement, and (2) that the alternative energy sector should be advanced right here in the good old U.S.A.

Not Flashy Enough for Prime Time: Wind and Taxes

The unemployment rate situation in Nevada isn’t the stuff of shiny flashy attention gathering news, but the unemployment rate is declining and has been since mid 2011.

Employment rates are lagging indicators, so we’d expect that the winding down of construction projects and the fall out from public sector job losses would take a while to show up in the Bureau of Labor Statistics compilations, but the worst seems to be behind us.  There are two reasons for this. (1) The unemployment rate itself, and (2) signs that taxable sales are gaining.

The unemployment rate in Nevada was 14.5% in December 2010, and is now an overall 11.7%, declining steadily for the last seven months.

Nevada’s taxable sales increased by 7.2% last March from the numbers for March 2011.  Clark County receipts increased 1.9% and Washoe County receipts were up 3%.  It’s White Pine County that is the most interesting of the rural counties.  “White Pine County posted a 672 percent gain in taxable sales to $161.3 million compared to $20.9 million in March 2011.” [NNB] What boosted the White Pine numbers?

“A $225 million wind farm project is being built by San Francisco-based Pattern Energy in White Pine County.”  [NNB]

And, who is Pattern Energy?

“Pattern Energy Group is one of North America’s leading independent wind and transmission companies. Our mission is to provide our customers with clean, renewable energy, which we seek to achieve by developing, constructing, owning and operating projects that are built for lasting success. We identify high-value opportunities in the renewable energy sector and then create and implement a plan to convert those opportunities into operating assets.”  [Pattern]

Interesting how Republicans are fond of citing one company, the unfortunate Solyndra Inc., as an exemplar of failed energy policy, but who’s heard of Pattern Energy, which describes its financing as follows:

“Facilitating our work is our financial strength as a company. We are well-capitalized with significant capital reserves and no corporate debt. We benefit from the partnership of our major stakeholder, a renewable energy investment fund managed by Riverstone Holdings LLC, an energy and power-focused investment firm. Riverstone’s support allows us to secure and arrange ample capital for the development, construction and operation of all our projects.”

In a single phrase: Capitalism works.  And, when companies are well managed, and not saddled with corporate debt, they can do things like inject a $225 million project in White Pine County, Nevada, or close a $245 million deal to construct a wind farm in Chile.   So, if one is looking for a one shot response to the Republican recitation of “Solyndra” smile and say “Pattern.”

Quick Picks: Bishops To Square One on Contraception

Bishops to Square One:  The US Conference of Catholic Bishops is pleased to announce their “Fortnight to Freedom,” June 21 to July 4, described by the Catholic News Agency, as follows:

“The initiative was created in response to several moves by the Obama administration that are threatening the Church’s religious freedom. The most well-known action is the Health and Human Services mandate that requires employers to cover birth control and other services that Catholics and other believers find morally objectionable.”

Now, what was that old line the Bishops used to find so objectionable, could it have been “They want to hang their religions around other people’s necks?”

Tax dollars are going out the back door to private schools.  This may not be what the Alliance for School Choice had in mind:

“While the scholarship programs have helped many children whose parents would have to scrimp or work several jobs to send them to private schools, the money has also been used to attract star football players, expand the payrolls of the nonprofit scholarship groups and spread the theology of creationism, interviews and documents show. Even some private school parents and administrators have questioned whether the programs are a charade.”  [NYT]

How many didn’t believe the programs were a charade in the first place?

Solyndra and Lobbyists in Romney’s Bundle?  If an article included  “Solyndra, lobbyists, fundraising, and Romney” would you click over and read it? Would it surprise anyone that Romney has not released the names of any of his bundlers?  We could guess we’d find the list in the stack with his tax returns?

The Not Debt Crisis?  Next time some one tells you that the national debt is Crushing the Nation!!!  Ask why then have Treasuries remained low after a $35 Billion 2 yr. sale. “The securities drew a yield of 0.300 percent…”  [Bloomberg]

Meanwhile back with the “Job Craters” — JPMorganChase is being sued by employees whose retirement funds were hit by the bank’s Big At Least $3B Blunder. “The defendants were accused of violating their duties to 401(k) and other retirement plan participants by including company stock as an investment option, hiding the stock’s risk, and failing to move participants to safer choices.” [Reuters]   And about their former risk manager… there were red flags. [Reuters]

Infrastructure Anyone: The Chinese say yes.  Reuters reports:

The pace of investment in the likes of roads, bridges and real estate is running at its weakest in nearly a decade, April data showed, suggesting the world’s second-biggest economy is heading for a sixth straight quarter of slowing growth.

To provide some support the government had asked for project proposals by the end of June, even for those initially earmarked for the end of the year, said the China Securities Journal, one of the country’s top financial papers.

Citing government sources, the article said Beijing did not rule out bringing forward next year’s projects, if it thought more investments would be needed to stimulate the economy.

Meanwhile, the American Energy and Infrastructure Act  stalled in the U.S. House of Representatives. [ASCE] There is a House-Senate Committee moving on the topic in fits and starts. [VTD]

Flowing Foreclosure money?  Want to see what your state has done with settlement funds from the Big Five Banks?  Pro Publica has the information in a convenient chart.

Yucca Mountain is Still Dead.  [Las Vegas Sun]

Nevada unemployment rate drops below 12% for the first time in 3 years.  [NNBureau]

Not Even A Step In The Right Direction: Senate GOP Blocks Buffett Rule

Yesterday the Senate had the opportunity to break the Republican filibuster of S. 2230, enacting the “Buffett Rule,” and appointed Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) voted with 44 other Republicans in the upper house to sustain that filibuster.   Proponents gathered 51 of the required 60 votes to break the logjam. [roll call 65]

The Congressional Research Service summarized what S. 2230 would have done, or might do, if the GOP filibuster could ever be broken:

“Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012 – Amends the Internal Revenue Code to require an individual taxpayer whose adjusted gross income exceeds $1 million to pay a minimum tax rate of 30% of the excess of the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income over the taxpayer’s modified charitable contribution deduction for the taxable year (tentative fair share tax). Establishes the amount of such tax as the excess (if any) of the tentative fair share tax over the excess of: (1) the sum of the taxpayer’s regular tax liability, the alternative minimum tax (AMT) amount, and the payroll tax for the taxable year; over (2) certain tax credits. Provides for a phase-in of such tax. Requires an inflation adjustment to the $1 million income threshold for taxable years beginning after 2013.

Expresses the sense of the Senate that Congress should enact tax reform that repeals unfair and unnecessary tax loopholes and expenditures, simplifies the tax system, and makes sure that the wealthiest taxpayers pay a fair share of taxes.”

OK, it wasn’t going to be a major revenue raiser for the federal treasury.  However, it is yet another example of the fundamental divide between Democratic and Republican definitions of “fairness.”

By Republican lights “fairness” comes when everyone is paying the same rate.  This is only “fair” for those who are already blessed with wealth and health.  Exacting 25% from the coffers of a person earning $1,000,000 per year would yield $250,000.  Leaving the individual with earnings of $750,000.   Not bad for an annual salary.  Exacting the same 25% from a person earning $50,000 annually yields $12,500; leaving the family with an annual income of $37,500 after federal taxes, a number well below the median income in Nevada.

The Republican schemes for a Flat Tax are also highly questionable because they conveniently avoid the discussion of other taxes the 99% do pay, especially payroll taxes.   Payments to the Social Security Trust Funds are capped at $106,800 meaning that any income earned above that level is not subject to that taxation.  Thus our millionaires and billionaires get a double dip.  They are taxed at a lesser rate for capital gains than the rate for the wages of a regular working stiff, AND they don’t have to pay SSTF taxes on any income above the cap.  Nice.

Senator Heller would evidently like to keep the current system in place, and denigrated S. 2230 as an election year “gimmick.”

“While Nevada struggles with high unemployment, the President and Senate Democrats have chosen to focus on a measure that will not create a single job.  They have ignored rising gas prices, have not passed a budget in more than three years, and shoved job-killing government health care on small businesses across the country.  Now, the best they can do is push a tax hike designed for nothing more than a campaign press release.  It’s no wonder the American people are so frustrated with Washington.  There is no question the tax code is unfair and needs an overhaul, but the so-called ‘Buffett Rule’ is nothing more than an election year campaign gimmick,” said Senator Dean Heller.”  [Heller]

What we have here really isn’t a commentary, nor any analysis of the provisions of S. 2230, it’s a campaign year focus-group talking point word salad with a light dressing of distraction politics.

The first message from Senator Heller seems to be that “we Republicans only want to vote on Jobs Bills.”    Which raises the immediate question: If you wanted to vote on a Jobs Bill why did you block the American Jobs Act in October 2011?  “The jobs package includes $250 billion in tax cuts, including reduced payroll taxes on both workers and employers; $60 billion in extended unemployment benefits; and $140 billion in spending on education, transportation projects and public workers, including police officers.”  [CBS] Oh, now we ought to recall that to help pay for the bill there was a 5.6% surtax on millionaires.  Senator Heller voted to sustain the GOP filibuster on that bill too. [roll call 160]

“They have ignored rising gas prices,  have not passed a budget in more than three years, and shoved job-killing government health care on small businesses across the country.”   Lovely sound bites these, but hardly a rationale for voting against a step in the right direction on tax policy.   First, no one’s “ignoring pump pain,” in fact our oil production has increased in the past three years:

“After declining to levels not seen since the 1940s, U.S. crude production began rising again in 2009. Drilling rigs have rushed into the nation’s oil fields, suggesting a surge in domestic crude is on the horizon.

The number of rigs in U.S. oil fields has more than quad­rupled in the past three years to 1,272, according to the Baker Hughes rig count. Including those in natural gas fields, the United States now has more rigs at work than the entire rest of the world.

“It’s staggering,” said Marshall Adkins, who directs energy research for the financial services firm Raymond James. “If we continue growing anywhere near that pace and keep squeezing demand out of the system, that puts you in a world where we are not importing oil in 10 years.” [Houston Chronicle]

Secondly, to  quote that radical liberal Ronald Reagan, “There they go again,” this time on the rather tired ‘Gee There’s No Budget talking point.’  The Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee debunked this one in a hurry:

“But Conrad said the Budget Control Act, which the Congress passed last summer after weeks of horse-trading over raising the debt ceiling, included the budget for this year and next year and that in many ways it is “stronger” and “more extensive” than a traditional budget.

He also went on suggest that any of his GOP his colleagues who continue to repeat the 1,000-day line would be guilty of either gross ignorance or deliberate deception.

“Either they don’t know what they did or they are misrepresenting what we all did,” Conrad said.

“If I hear another assertion … I will know that somebody is not telling the truth,” he said. “[I] hope now we have laid this issue to rest.” [The Hill]

So, which was it?  Did Senator Heller mean he was grossly ignorant of the Budget Control Act or is he being deliberately deceptive?

And third, Oh that job-killing health care reform act…“  Precisely how is an act which created opportunities for training 500 new primary care physicians by 2015 a job killer? Or, support for 600 new physicians assistants, or another 600 nurse practitioners, or a program for opening 10 new nurse administered clinics, or encouraging states to augment programs for increasing their professional health care work force by 10% to 25% become a “job killer?”  Does increasing access to health care facilities in underserved areas constitute a job killing exercise?  Does a Department of Labor initiative to increase job training in health care professions classify as Job Killing?

How does expanded financial assistance to health care trainees constitute Job Kill? How does granting tax breaks to health care professionals who serve in remote or difficult locations fall into the Job Kill category?  [DHHS]

There have been several analyses of the total job impact of the Affordable Care Act and Patients Bill of Rights which show employment related statistics along a predictable range on the ideological spectrum.  Politifact may come as close as any estimate to the job creation actually in the offing under the ACA:

“In reality, the number of jobs produced per year would vary, according to the report. For instance, in 2013, the number of jobs created under the second scenario would be about 210,000. That number would climb to nearly 800,000 in 2019.”

Not only is labeling every initiative which might impinge on corporate profitability or executive compensation as “job killing” inaccurate, it’s also intellectually lazy.

OMG It’s A Tax Hike!  This generalization also ignores that the provisions of S. 2203 aren’t a tax hike on everyone, and certainly not on the 99% of the country earning less than a cool million annually.

Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) issued a statement yesterday emphasizing this point:

Yesterday Senate Republicans once again rejected the idea that millionaires and billionaires should contribute their fair share to help this country prosper. Republicans sent a message to millions of honest, hard-working Americans who will file their taxes today: it’s fair for Warren Buffett to pay a lower tax rate than his secretary. Republicans said it’s fair for Mitt Romney to pay a lower tax rate than his cleaning lady or his chauffer. They believe it’s fair for hedge fund managers and executives to pay a lower tax rate than school teachers and waitresses and bus drivers.

That’s just crazy. But that’s not my word for it. That’s what President Ronald Reagan called a system of “unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share.”  In 1985, Ronald Reagan knocked the web of loopholes that allowed people making hundreds of millions of dollars each year to pay lower tax rates than construction workers or janitors. President Reagan called it “crazy.”  This broken system “made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary,” Reagan said. But the same system is in place today. And, as that radical liberal Ronald Reagan said, “That’s just crazy.”

Apparently, Senator Heller has moved somewhere far to the right of that aforementioned radical liberal Ronald Reagan.  The Class Warriors seem to have all lined up somewhere well to the right of the old Morning in America Man, and Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) noted the weaponry assembled by Senator Heller and his brigade:

“Yesterday my Republican colleagues used some strong words to oppose Democrats’ plan to right that inequality. Republicans called our common-sense proposal to ensure no one making more than a $1 million a year pays a lower tax rate than a truck driver, a secretary or a police officer “class warfare.” Republicans are pushing a budget that would end Medicare as we know it, slash nursing home coverage for the elderly, decimate Pell Grant funding and kick 200,000 kids out of the Head Start Program.

And they’re calling our proposal class warfare? I wish that were the most ridiculous thing Republicans have said about our proposal to bring a measure of fairness to America’s tax system. Far from it. One member of Senate Republican Leadership equated this measure to “shooting ourselves in the head.”

Shooting themselves in the foot during an election year may be more like it.  Senator Reid continued:

“The Paying a Fair Share Act – also called the Buffettt Rule – would have ensured millionaires and billionaires paid at least as much as their secretaries, assistants and nannies. Yet Republicans think asking those lucky millionaires and billionaires to contribute their fair share is just like shooting the country in the head. Our legislation would have protected 99 percent of small business owners, and maintained deductions for charitable giving. And it would have been a small but meaningful step to reduce our deficit at a time when every penny – or in this case, every billion – counts.

It doesn’t seem radical to me to ask Warren Buffett – who made almost $63 million in 2010 – to pay a higher tax rate than his secretary. It didn’t seem radical to Ronald Reagan, either. And it doesn’t seem radical to the three-quarters of Americans who support our legislation.

The wealthiest Americans take home a greater percentage of the nation’s income than at any time in nearly a century. Yet they enjoy the lowest tax rate in more than 50 years. So it’s no surprise Americans believe millionaires should shoulder their fair share. Even two-thirds of millionaires – and a majority of Republicans around the country – agree it’s time to fix a system rigged to favor of the richest of the rich.

Republicans in Congress are the only ones who aren’t on board. If you need evidence that millionaires and billionaires can afford to contribute a little more, consider this fact: last year there were 7,000 people who made more than $1 million but didn’t pay a single penny in federal income taxes. Not one thin dime.  Thanks to Republicans, those lucky millionaires and billionaires can keep gaming the system, while middle-class workers keep picking up the tab.”

It will take more than highly generalized talking point word salad with a dressing of political distraction to dig GOP candidates out of this particular hole in 2012.

Coffee and the Papers: Fire Away

** Appointed Senator Dean Heller’s  (R-NV) opposition to the confirmation of Elissa Cadish to the federal bench may doom the nomination. [LVSun] It seems the nominee once said that “reasonable restrictions” might be applied to gun ownership and use.  It is always so much nicer when an excuse can be found, than  admit that the Senate GOP leadership has been slow rolling the confirmation of federal judges and other administration candidates.  [See Judicial Nominations.Org]

** Senator Heller’s position, that gun ownership is an absolute Constitutional right, and should not be subject to case by case consideration, leaves several important questions unanswered.  (1) Does an individual with a documented and immediate medical history of mental illness have a constitutional right to obtain and use a firearm? (Think: Tucson, Virginia Tech)  (2) Does an individual who has been incarcerated for a felony involving the personal injury or death of another person have a constitutional right to obtain and use a firearm?  (3) Does a person having a known affiliation with a violent drug cartel have the constitutional right to obtain and use a firearm?  The argument that with rights come responsibilities is often offered by gun ownership advocates, so if a person uses, or is very likely to use, a firearm in an irresponsible way then does the community have no recourse but to endure the consequent tragedy?

** Senator Heller’s position on firearms regulation most closely aligns with that of married  white men over the age of 50, who have incomes between $75,000 and $99,000 per year, who self identify as conservative Republicans, belong to evangelical Protestant churches, and live in rural areas.  [Pew Research pdf]

** So, if it is necessary to “Drill Baby Drill,” and some supposed shortage of gasoline responsible for higher gasoline prices, then why is Flint Hills Resources Alaska shutting down their North Pole Refinery for the next five months?  [ADN] The firm cites high global crude prices.

** Bring it on, Planned Parenthood filed suit against the state of Texas asserting that the state improperly excluded its clinics from participating in the Medicaid women’s health program. [Austin]

** Department of No Surprises: “Mid-Incomers Suffer in Polarized U.S. Job Market,” [Bloomberg] “Americans at the top and bottom of the income scale are benefiting most from the jobs recovery while those in the middle are getting left behind. “

** Wendy’s is the 6th firm to pull its support from ALEC. [PR Watch]

** What war on women?  In Arizona it is now illegal to have an abortion after 18 weeks of pregnancy because the state will start the clock on the first day of the woman’s last menstrual period. [Think Progress] Mississippi is now considering a bill to ban abortions after six weeks of gestation even if the woman’s health is at serious risk. [ThinkProgress] Anti-abortion advocates are launching a new constitutional amendment campaign in Florida. [NewsPress] An ultrasound bill is up for consideration in the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee. [BostonGlobe]  Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed 50 bills into law including one requiring an emphasis on abstinence only sex education, barring abortion coverage in health insurance exchanges, and repealing the state’s Equal Pay for Equal Work non-discrimination statute. [FDN]  More than 50% of all women in the U.S. of reproductive age now live in states hostile to abortion. [Guttmacher]

** The federal government increased online access to conflict of interest data as a result of the newly enacted STOCK Act.  [OMBWatch]

** Congressional pressure is increasing for the Pentagon to rein in its increasing reliance on private contractors. [POGO] The GAO is questioning the Pentagon’s expenditures with private contractors. [GovExec]

** Right wing’ers are attacking a 17 year old Ohio high school student for wearing a T-shirt saying “Jesus Is Not A Homophobe.”  [RightWingWatch]