No, RTD, Hurricane Helene Not Proof of ‘Climate Change’

Posted on October 3, 2024 by Stephen D. Haner
Share this article on:

The Richmond Times-Dispatch no longer has a climate alarmist on staff, so today it fell to one of its liberal political columnists (it still has two of those, they will be the last employees out the door) to blame Hurricane Helene on “climate change.”

It was a terrible storm, no question. But it wasn’t the first terrible storm, and it was no worse than plenty of storms from decades or even a century ago. See for example the Raleigh News and Observer front page reporting a very similar storm in Asheville and the rest of North Carolina in 1916. That 1916 storm caused havoc on the entire East Coast, more territory than Helene just did (because it stalled over the mountains).

Michael Paul Williams’ column is quite honest about the history of similar storms, including Camille that devastated Nelson and Albemarle Counties in 1969 and Agnes that caused major Virginia flooding in 1972. The algorithm that substitutes for human editors at the “newspaper” added after the on-line column a series of photos from Agnes, 52 years ago, when CO2 levels were far lower than they are today.

Yet Williams implies, as has every major media voice in the Climate Alarmist Consortium, that we just need to buy EVs and put solar on our houses, and all will be well. Riiiight. He adds the political angle to blame “voters” who “deny” the obvious truth that climate change is worsening such storms.

It isn’t about the CO2. It never has been. The actual global data below (and only trust the count since satellites began tracking all storms) shows no clear trend line. Look below. It doesn’t. That chart ends with 2023, and 2024 is still underway, but predictions of a record year in the Atlantic so far are not panning out. But this one very bad storm is sufficient to feed the narrative that “climate change” is to blame for all bad weather. Were there no storms in 2024, somebody would also spin that as resulting from “climate change.”

Such storms happen, always have and always will, and as more people move to and build more buildings and parking lots in coastal surge zones and 100-year flood plains, creating more impermeable surfaces and structures to be wiped out, the flooding will just get worse. Asheville and the other damaged cities and towns are far more developed today than 108 years ago, which had to add to the water height. Be prepared.

One paragraph in Williams’ column that is 100% true, emphasis added:

“For years, towns like Asheville had been listed as ‘climate havens’ by some sources, seemingly because its winter climate is less harsh than the rest of the mountains and its summer climate is milder than areas farther east,” said Corey Davis, the assistant state climatologist for North Carolina. “This latest event absolutely exposes the current reality that almost nowhere is safe from extreme weather.”

Posted in Energy, Environment, Government Reform | Leave a comment

A Transparent Effort to Increase General Assembly Authority to Eliminate Hydrocarbon Fuels

Posted on September 26, 2024 by Stephen D. Haner
Share this article on:

Any doubt that some members of the Virginia General Assembly’s reconstituted electricity regulation commission intend on taking full control of our energy economy was dispelled at its second meeting Wednesday.  With that control, the goal is to then impose a full anti-hydrocarbon energy agenda.

Three proposed legislative initiatives were floated.  None were voted on, and opposition quickly surfaced from some other panel members and in comments, especially from the state’s dominant electric utility. The three proposals (also available on the group’s state website) were:

·    A draft bill that would dictate a 13-point checklist of factors the regulatory State Corporation Commission would have to use in evaluating any application where it has the power to decide what is or is not in the public interest. Anti-hydrocarbon fuel provisions were prominent among the new elements.

·    A staff white paper on a complete revision of the integrated resource plan process now in state law. One proposal was to override an SCC requirement that those plans offer an option that illustrates the lowest cost for meeting the energy needs, which invariably is a lower consumer cost than the plans which comply with the Virginia Clean Economy Act. It also proposed bringing transmission and distribution issues into what would be an “integrated system plan” and again adding emphasis on ending hydrocarbon energy.

·    A draft bill to change of the group’s name from the Commission on Electric Utility Regulation to the Virginia Energy Commission, with an expansion of its oversight authority to the entirety of the state’s energy policy, which envisions ending the use of hydrocarbons in Virginia agriculture, transportation and new buildings along with electricity.

Chairman Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, argued the proposal on “in the public interest” determinations was simply an effort to promote more transparency from the State Corporation Commission. “Transparency” was his go to word often in the meeting, but to those in the room familiar with the current SCC practices, the intent to force radical change was what was most “transparent.”

But the draft was immediately challenged by Senator Creigh Deeds, D-Charlottesville, who noted the General Assembly made some major reforms in the SCC’s processes just two sessions ago and has finally appointed a full panel of SCC judges. “A lot of us have said for years we need to just let the SCC do its job.”

Dominion brought its main lawyer on SCC cases, Joseph K. Reid III of McGuireWoods, to challenge that proposal. “We don’t believe the Commission’s process is broken,” he told the legislators and public members. “I’m not sure what problem this bill is trying to fix.”

Most of the elements enumerated in the bills, some of them quite vague, are the issues the SCC process examines, and any party to the case can introduce just about any issue it wants to advocate.  While SCC final orders seldom delve into all of them, before the final order there is a long hearing process, and a hearing officer does write a longer report that usually touches on every issue raised.

What the current process doesn’t do is require the SCC to explicitly accept or reject and reveal how much weight it gave to every single argument or fact. And if required to do so – as a lawyer with Surovell’s ability knows – it will create innumerable new opportunities for disappointed parties to appeal.

The current process puts great weight on the traditional question when considering a new power plant or new transmission line. Is it needed, is the plan proposed reasonable and prudent, were alternatives considered, what will be the short term and long-term cost to consumer, has it received the needed environmental permits? To that the proposed bill would add, arguably with equal weight to prudent cost and necessity:

·    All positive and negative effects on public health, public safety, and the environment, including the proposal’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation, transportation, or buildings. (Buildings? They contemplate “in the public interest” decisions on buildings at the SCC?)

·    The effect of the proposal on a utility’s ability to meet the goals of the renewable energy portfolio standard program.

·    The social cost of carbon, as a benefit or a cost, whichever is appropriate.

The “social cost of carbon” is the most important proposed new element. The dollar value used is subjective, controversial, and some believe it is imaginary. Determining that number and applying it to a cost-benefit formula will kill any future hydrocarbon proposal or transmission designed to serve a hydrocarbon plant and put a fat thumb on the scale in favor of wind, solar or battery projects. It might be neutral on a nuclear proposal.

But as Dominion’s Reid pointed out, only hydrocarbon or nuclear proposals would face these tests. The draft bill concluded with a carve out for any project “where the relevant statutes expressly provide a standard for such determination or declare a project to be in the public interest.”  That means all the solar, wind and battery projects already declared “in the public interest” by the Virginia Clean Economy Act need not be subjected to these new tests.

Could the effort be more transparent? Surovell himself noted that the carve-out seemed a bit unfair and said it might change in a future draft. By the end of the meeting, Surovell was adding the bill might not be ready for the 2025 session at all.

Posted in Government Reform | Leave a comment

WMATA Needs Anthony Williams

Posted on September 24, 2024 by Derrick A. Max
Share this article on:

In today’s Washington Times, Congressman Frank Wolf (VA-10, Retired) and Thomas Jefferson Institute President Derrick Max discuss Metro’s importance to the region, its near billion dollar deficits, its growing burden on local and state budgets, and the need for an empowered CFO to get Metro on solid financial footing. They also reject any discussion of a dedicated “Metro Tax” until substantial reforms are in place.

They write: “Metro’s financing troubles are well known. Billion dollar annual operating deficits are looming, billions in federal pandemic relief are ending, ridership has collapsed, and local jurisdictions are buckling under the annual bailout payments needed to keep the system afloat.”

“To avoid bankruptcy and to restore faith in Metro, WMATA needs a data-driven, results oriented CFO with unfettered powers, the ability to rewrite contracts, and to think outside the box for additional revenue.”

The authors compare WMATA’s financial troubles to those of Washington, D.C. in the early 1990s and call for the same person to right WMATA’s books as he once did successfully for our Nation’s Capital — former D.C. Mayor Anthony Williams!

The authors conclude: “Anthony Williams’ abilities are well known. He has a record of accomplishment that put Washington, D.C. on sound financial footing, and he has recently spelled out a credible path to do the same for Metro. WMATA needs you, Mayor Williams! Let’s make Metro work.”

Read Wolf and Max’s timely and insightful commentary in the Washington Times by clicking here.

Posted in Transportation | Leave a comment

Will Virginia’s Vote for President Disappear?

Posted on September 23, 2024 by Christian Braunlich
Share this article on:

As anyone with an email address or cell phone knows, Republicans and Democrats have ramped up their November battle.

The near-term focus has meant Democrats concentrating on Getting Out the Vote and Republicans placing a new emphasis on Election Integrity.

What conservatives are ignoring, however, is the Left’s look over the horizon with a progressive plan to ensure future Republican presidential defeats.

That plan and its future implications will be discussed by Save Our States Distinguished Fellow Michael Maibach at an October 1 Federal Policy Dinner in Tysons Corner. You can register by clicking here.

The progressive National Popular Vote proposal would make Virginia part of an interstate compact in which Virginia would be forced to give its Electoral College votes to whoever wins the national popular vote – regardless of how Virginians vote in future presidential elections.

With more than half of America’s population in just nine states, it would mean Virginians cede their decision to states like California, New York, Illinois, and Michigan. New York City alone, with a population larger than 39 states, would have an outsized influence on choosing the president.

This is precisely one of the reasons America’s Founding Fathers organized presidential elections with an Electoral College: To prevent the power of larger states from overwhelming the influence of smaller ones.

That balance has worked well for 237 years, even if the victor didn’t always receive the most votes. Five times, presidents have been elected with less than a plurality; 19 times with less than a majority … including John Quincy Adams, John F. Kennedy, Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman and a fellow named Abraham Lincoln.

Now ostensibly, the case being made by progressives is one of fairness: Americans should be able to vote directly for their president.

But few Western nations offer that opportunity. Of the 27 European Union countries, only two – Cypress and France — provide for direct elections. The others utilize a parliamentary system in which the head of government is chosen based on the composition of that nation’s legislature: Winston Churchill was never on the ballot for Prime Minister.

Direct popular elections have instead been the domain of such countries as Iran, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Russia, and a host of smaller countries.

Those looking to “democratize” the election would more appropriately duplicate Maine and Nebraska’s “split-vote model,” allocating one electoral vote to whoever wins each congressional district.  Yes, the Republican nominee would gain some electoral votes in places like California and New York, but the Democratic nominee would garner electoral votes in states like Alabama and Texas.

But don’t hold your breath. Fairness isn’t the Left’s goal. Victory is … and at all costs.

That’s why Maibach’s talk on October 1 is so important.

NPV organizers are trying to dramatically tear up the method of electing a President without even first obtaining the benefit of a national legislative consensus or even agreement by a majority of states.

A system created by the U.S. Constitution would be ripped apart without going through the annoying trouble of changing the Constitution. Their proposal simply requires a majority of states, representing 271 electoral votes, to agree to give their electoral votes to whoever gets the most national votes.

It’s a proposal guaranteed to exacerbate divisions in the country.

And it will be even worse to administer. Because it does not set a uniform standard and has none of the rules, guidelines, and protections that would exist in a truly nationalized election, results will set off a flurry of lawsuits.

In Virginia, for example, early voting started last Friday. But California early voting does not start until October 7; New York starts October 26. Will voters whose votes have been turned over to a majority decision made in other states have legal standing to sue? Will the type of voting machines state “A” uses give cause to further legal action by residents of state “B” using a different machine, since their votes will now have been decided by a state with different rules and different machines? Will recounts now have to be conducted not in one state but in all states?

If you liked the 2000 Florida recount or the accusations of a stolen election in 2020, you’ll love what the National Popular Vote scheme will do.

Yet, they are close. NPV organizers have secured changes in 18 states representing 209 electoral votes. Here in Virginia, it’s been introduced by Delegate Dan Helmer (D-Clifton). When enough states change their law to guarantee 271 electoral votes, the trigger will be pulled to impose the process on the country.

Trump supporters who contend the 2020 election was stolen haven’t provided the evidence. But in state after state, the election process was legally altered by, before the vote, changing laws and regulations governing those elections – usually without objection from the Republican Party or even the Trump White House. To paraphrase George Washington Plunkitt of Tammany Hall: “They seen their opportunities and they took ‘em.”

Progressives are thinking strategically, looking ahead not at this election but future ones, seeing their opportunities and taking them. Conservatives need to do the same, gather their arguments and make plans to stop the game plan before it moves farther.

Maibach will outline the threat and the strategy at the Thomas Jefferson Institute’s Federal Policy Dinner on October 1. It’s a good place to start fighting back.

Posted in Government Reform | Leave a comment

The Trade Policies of Both Candidates are Bad for Virginia

Posted on September 13, 2024 by Derrick A. Max
Share this article on:
One issue that is not getting enough attention in this election, especially for its impact on Virginia, is the growing “anti-trade” mentality of both major parties. In Tuesday’s debate, former President Donald Trump stated, “other countries are going to finally, after 75 years, pay us back for all that we’ve done for the world, and the tariff will be substantial…” Vice President Kamala Harris accurately responded that increased tariffs aren’t paid by foreign countries, but are really a sales tax on US consumers.

It is important to note, however, that Harris and the Biden administration have kept all of the increased tariffs from the first Trump administration in place. In May, they even raised tariffs on $18 billion of Chinese goods, including semiconductors and electric vehicles. The left remains committed to tariffs (sadly, often as a tool to force their green agenda) and the right is drifting against trade out of a misplaced “America First” mentality.

Even the Heritage Foundation, once a champion of free trade, in its much mischaracterized Project 2025 manifesto is waffling on free trade. In fact, Project 2025 contains two contradictory chapters — one by Peter Navarro entitled, “The Case for Fair Trade” and one by Kent Lassman entitled, “the Case for Free Trade.” It is clear that Heritage’s new trade philosophy increasingly emphasizes the need for “reciprocity and fairness” in trade agreements over open markets and increased trade.

This shift is not just bad for America generally, but is particularly bad for Virginia. International trade continues to play a vital role in Virginia’s economy, driving growth, supporting jobs, and enhancing competitiveness. According to the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, in 2023, Virginia exported $22.4 billion worth of goods, with key markets including Canada, China, and India. The agricultural sector alone contributed $1.5 billion in exports, underscoring its importance to the state. Additionally, over 7,000 Virginia-based companies are engaged in exporting, 85% of which are small- and medium-sized enterprises.

Trade accounts for roughly one in five jobs in the Commonwealth. These jobs span various industries, from manufacturing and agriculture to defense and technology. The state’s robust international engagement is further amplified by initiatives like the Virginia Economic Development Partnership’s VALET program, which has helped hundreds of businesses expand globally, contributing significantly to job creation and revenue growth.

Furthermore, improvements at The Port of Virginia, now one of the most advanced on the East Coast, have tripled its economic impact over the last two decades, reaching $92 billion in annual output. This has reinforced Virginia’s role as a critical hub for international trade. David White, Executive Director of the Virginia Maritime Association, is right when he argues that Virginia’s top spot on CNBC’s ranking of Top States for Doing Business is due in large part because of our robust shipping and maritime industries.

Rather than turning away from free trade, what Virginia needs now is a return to former President Ronald Reagan’s unwavering belief in free trade. Reagan rightly believed that trade was not just to expand America’s economic pie (which it has done remarkably over the last 30 years), but also to build wealth in our allies. It was viewed as an extension of individual liberty worldwide and a means of promoting peace and understanding between nations. In his view, when countries engage in mutually beneficial trade, they are less likely to resort to conflict.

During his Presidency, Reagan initiated the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations, which culminated in the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), a global institution designed to oversee and regulate international trade. Reagan also signed the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, a precursor to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) now called the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which aimed to eliminate trade barriers between the United States, Canada, and Mexico.

Yes, Reagan sometimes overlooked inequalities in trade deals, but it was out of a hope of building wealth and peace and as a counter to the expansion of the then threatening eastern bloc. His policies worked.

Today, Russia is again on the move and China is rattling its sword towards Taiwan. We need friends and allies today, almost as much as we did back then! Free trade is an essential part of making those friendships a reality. It also is critical for our sustained economic leadership. In Virginia, as in the rest of the country, trade allows for greater wealth and economic security.

Leaders in both parties from Virginia need to press their respective leadership to keep America, and Virginia, open for business. This should be a bipartisan priority for the sake of Virginia’s economy.

Derrick Max is the President and CEO of the Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy. He can be reached at [email protected].
Posted in Business, Economy, Politics | Comments Off on The Trade Policies of Both Candidates are Bad for Virginia