Energy & Environment

Population Bombing

Ron Tang — Mon, 19 May 2008 08:46:00 -0400

In the 20th century, a global network of colluding activists, institutions, and governments sought to engineer solutions to various real and perceived social problems by, as Matthew Connelly puts it in his new book, planning "other people's families." In its most egregious expression, this movement led to the forced sterilization of millions of people around the world, including many thousands in the U.S., on the grounds that they were -- genetically or otherwise -- unfit. California alone had sterilized 7,500 people by 1931, and the practice continued in other states up until the 1970s.

This movement also, through philanthropies and government-directed… more

Competing in the Green Economy

Communications — Wed, 14 May 2008 08:00:00 -0400

A New America Event
05/14/2008 - 3:00pm

On May 14th the New America Foundation held an event on the future of solar technology and America’s competitive edge. Mike Splinter, President and CEO of Applied Materials, was the featured speaker for the event. Rhone Resch, President of Solar Energy Industries Association, was invited to offer opening remarks. The event was moderated by Steven Clemons, Director of the American Strategy Program at New America. An MP3 audio recording can be downloaded below, while video is available at right.

To begin his discussion, Mr. Splinter raised the issue of record-high energy prices; oil prices are rapidly rising and the cost of coal has doubled in the last year. There is a great demand from the American people for energy alternatives. Mr. Splinter believes renewable energy is the solution. He stated that within a century renewable energy could provide 100% of the world’s primary energy needs.

There is also increasing competition overseas as Germany and China take the lead in developing renewable energies. Mr. Splinter believes the U.S. should take the lead rather than follow in developing a low-carbon economy. He offered a three-step formula for America to take the lead in renewable energy. First, there should be significant loan guarantees for businesses that invest in clean energy production. Next, there should be a significant increase in R&D for America to maintain its technological edge. Finally, Congress should pass a long-term extension of the solar investment tax to encourage extensive investment in infrastructure.

Mr. Splinter concluded by stating the urgent need for an energy solution, “Energy and the environment are the two biggest social and economic issues of our time. America has the ability to make a difference.”

-Faith Smith, American Strategy Intern

The Presidential Candidates' Domestic Policy Plans

Communications — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:30:00 -0400

A New America Event
04/29/2008 - 8:30am

On Tuesday the 29th of April, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, in association with the New America Foundation, American University and the Tax Foundation, hosted an event concerning the major domestic policy issues facing the nation before the upcoming presidential election. Focusing on the candidates’ policy proposals, the event featured four panels of policy experts. The first three—on climate change, health care, and tax reform—featured independent experts from across the political spectrum, expressing varied and often contradictory views on their issues of expertise. The final panel featured economic advisors from the campaigns themselves, who gave the audience a glimpse of the candidates’ views on these important policy issues.

The first panel, moderated by David Wessel of the Wall Street Journal, concerned climate change policy. The panelists, William Pizer of Resources for the Future, Nikki Roy of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change and Robert McNally of the Tudor Investment Corporation agreed that all three candidates had promising positions on the issue from the perspective of an environmentalist. At the same time, all three expressed skepticism about the candidates’ commitment to the issue. Pizer pointed out that there are four major components to a national environmental policy—cost, competitiveness, allocation and treatment of preexisting state-level climate policies—that will make climate legislation difficult to design and equally difficult to move through congress. Roy complained that none of the candidates were campaigning on the issue, despite supporting it on their websites. Without putting it out front in the campaign, he suggested, the candidates would not have the political capital to push legislation through once they are elected. McNally added that whatever legislation eventually passed would take years to do so, and that eventual success might have to be driven by a small energy crisis, such as widespread brown-outs in major cities. In the end, the panelists agreed that the scientific community had reached a strong consensus, but disagreed about whether the American public would continue to support climate change policy as it drives up energy bills.

The second panel, also moderated by Wessel, featured a discussion on healthcare reform from John Sheils of the Lewin Group, Joe Antos of the American Enterprise Institute, and Len Nichols of the New America Foundation. Sheils spoke first, discussing the employer tax exclusion for health insurance and the problems associated with it. In addition to costing around $250 billion in forgone public revenue, he explained, the exclusion is regressive and leads to over-purchasing of health insurance. It could be improved, he suggested, by replacing the exclusion with a standard deduction or tax credit. Nichols and Antos spoke next, taking turns discussing the good and bad parts of the Presidential candidates’ proposals. Nichols spoke favorably of McCain’s willingness to propose supply-side delivery system reforms and his decision to use the existing employer tax exclusion funds to subsidize individuals through a tax credit, rather than a tax deduction. At the same time, Nichols expressed concerns that McCain’s proposal to allow insurance to be purchased across state lines would leave insurance inaccessible for some Americans, particularly the sick, and disappointment that McCain has not discussed covering all Americans as a goal. Antos liked that the Democrats focused on bringing down healthcare costs and included some elements of consumerism, and was also happy that neither was claiming universal coverage as a free lunch. At the same time, he felt their plans include promises which couldn’t be kept, such as universal coverage and insurance “as good as your Congressman’s,” while over-regulating, overspending, and providing a back-door to single-payer healthcare.

The third panel, on tax policy, was moderated by Rudy Penner of the Urban Institute. Penner gave opening remarks, and then handed the microphone over to Alex Brill of the American Enterprise Institute, Len Burman of the Tax Policy Center and Scott Hodge of the Tax Foundation. All three agreed that tax policy is reaching a crucial point, with the Bush tax cuts expiring, the AMT reaching millions of new taxpayers every year, and the costs of government rising. Both Brill and Hodge supported McCain’s proposal to lower the corporate rate, citing its positive effect on growth and American competitiveness. Burman had few kind words for the current slate of policies the candidates have proposed, reserving particular disapproval for McCain’s gas-tax-holiday proposal, which Clinton has since supported. Following their opening remarks on the candidates’ plans, the panelists discussed the potential for a value added tax (VAT) to help solve some of these problems. All three agreed that it could be a useful tool, with Burman suggesting that it might help pay for health care, and Hodge saying that it could cover some of the cost of lowering the corporate tax rate.

The final panel, also moderated by Penner, featured a discussion between the economic advisors of the remaining presidential candidates, including Brian Deese, Dan Tarullo, and Kevin Hassett of the Clinton, Obama, and McCain campaigns, respectively. All three representatives believed his candidate would be best for the economy, but set out different economic goals. According to Tarullo, Obama’s policies will aim to foster a stable environment for economic growth, relief for the middle class, improved productivity, and a sustainable international economic environment. McCain, according to Hassett, would lower tax rates and improve the tax code to encourage economic growth and international competitiveness, while ensuring that lower taxes are accompanied by smaller government. Deese, finally, explained Clinton’s goals of addressing the “middle-class squeeze,” increasing the international attractiveness, restoring fiscal responsibility, and ensuring proactive and pragmatic executive leadership to address economic problems as they come.

-Marc Goldwein and Paul McLaughlin, Program Associates for the Fiscal Policy Program

What High Oil Prices Can Do For a Country

Ron Tang — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:43:00 -0400

From the outside, Effat College doesn't seem like a bellwether of change. The all-girls school in Jeddah, a port city on the coast of the Red Sea, is rimmed by unscalable high walls and an empty parking lot, resembling the scene of a freshly departed circus in Middle America. In many ways, the college's exterior illustrates conventional misperceptions -- closed, drab, and unwelcoming -- of modern Saudi Arabia. Perhaps the only thing less inviting is the bold, red lettering at the top of the form handed to visitors as they enter the kingdom, which reads: "WARNING: Death to Drug Traffickers."

But… more

Flynt Leverett in National Interest Online | Inside Track: Pole Dancing

Communications — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:17:00 -0400

New America in the News:

National Interest Online | Inside Track: Pole Dancing

. . . Next to speak was Flynt Leverett of the New America Foundation, who focused on the economic foundation of the world without the West: developing countries are nationalizing their natural resources and converting them into political leverage, with startling success. Leverett maintained that the dramatic increase in energy prices since 2000 tips the geopolitical scales in the direction of oil-and-gas producing powers. The “strategic consequence” of these developments is a huge redistribution of wealth and economic power. Energy exporters like the GCC states and Russia gain; other beneficiaries include manufacturing powerhouses like China, Germany and Japan. Most ominously, the losers from high energy prices—the United States, Great Britain and the European Union—are ringing up large current-account deficits, putting them at the mercy of China and the energy exporters who finance their fiscal shortfalls.

Like Gvosdev and Weber, Leverett saw a huge disconnect between the foreign-policy rhetoric of the U.S. presidential candidates and the actual situation, going so far as to say that Obama, Clinton and McCain must be talking about “some other planet.” . . .

Terry Tamminen on CNET | Interview on Clean-Tech Industry

Communications — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:24:00 -0400

New America in the News:

CNET | Interview on Clean-Tech Industry

The clean-tech industry of today is in its early stages, about where Microsoft was in 1980, says Terry Tamminen, an adviser at Pegasus Capital Advisors and the former director of California's Environmental Protection Agency. Now a main force behind the state's rise to the top as a climate change policy maker, Tamminen sits down with CNET News.com's Carl-Gustav Linden in Santa Monica, Calif.

Terry Tamminen on NewsHour | Schwarzenegger Adviser Outlines U.S. Oil Addiction

Communications — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:47:00 -0400

New America in the News:

NewsHour | Schwarzenegger Adviser Outlines U.S. Oil Addiction

In the fourth installment of the NewsHour's Costly Crude series, environmentalist and adviser to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger Terry Tamminen discusses the shrinking oil supply with Ray Suarez.

Waste Not

Ron Tang — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 07:24:00 -0400

Forty years ago, the steel mills and factories south of Chicago were known for their sooty smokestacks, plumes of steam, and throngs of workers. Clean-air laws have since gotten rid of the smoke, and labor-productivity initiatives have eliminated most of the workers. What remains is the steam, billowing up into the sky day after day, just as it did a generation ago.

The U.S. economy wastes 55 percent of the energy it consumes, and while American companies have ruthlessly wrung out other forms of inefficiency, that figure hasn’t changed much in recent decades. The amount lost by electric utilities alone could… more

Core Arguments

Ron Tang — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 05:24:00 -0400

A generation after Three Mile Island's near-disaster in 1979, nuclear power remains politically radioactive. Though energy consumption has increased dramatically -- Americans upped their per capita household electrical use by a third between 1980 and 2001 -- no new nuclear plants have been built since 1996. We've let the Mighty Atom sit in the penalty box rather than settle whether we're Pro-Nuke or No-Nuke once and for all.

In her provocative yet flawed and often frustrating book, "Power to Save the World," Gwyneth Cravens does us all the service of taking a fresh look at nuclear power and asking whether the… more

Terry Tamminen in Baltimore Sun | 'Pollution Bill Attacked'

Communications — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:57:00 -0500

New America in the News:

Pollution Bill Attacked (The Baltimore Sun)

...Environmentalists, scientists, public health experts and alternative energy companies also pledged their support for the Global Warming Solutions Act during a Senate hearing yesterday. The supporters argue that state limits are necessary to spur federal action and will help to prevent deadly floods and economic chaos brought by climate change. ...

...Former California Environmental Protection Agency Secretary Terry Tamminen said costs for most customers and businesses would go down because regulations created by the state would encourage conservation. Tamminen said per capita energy consumption in California dropped 40 percent during the past decade because of its regulations.