As we can all remember on that fatal day on June 28th of 2012, when Obamacare passed the Supreme Court on a 5 to 4 decision. The socialist left repeated the mantra ad nauseum, “Elections have consequences!”

We remember hearing that same axiom previously when both Sotomayor and Kagan were confirmed. Even  Lindsey Graham, the Republican Senator of South Carolina (that bastion of Christian Conservatism that booed the “Golden Rule” during the Presidential Primary Debates) repeated that line with his “yea” vote for Kagan in her confirmation to the high bench. Yes South Carolina, elections do have consequences. Thanks for electing that guy.

This article isn’t going to site all the numerous times that the line had been used in American politics. Suffice it to say, it is commonly used by both sides dependent on who’s holding the reigns of power at that time.

On November 2nd, former mayor of New York City, Rudy Gulliani, commented on The Kudlow Report about the infrastructure problems the power grid has experienced do to super storm Sandy. Laying the problem at President Obama’s feet and blaming the President’s energy policy,

He stated,  

” which is the reason why we’re having such a tough time recovering. … this aging infrastructure that we have. Well, we haven’t rebuilt it, not because we don’t have the money to do it, we haven’t rebuilt it because all these groups oppose every single thing you want to do. If you want to build a new generator, they oppose that. If you want to build new transmission lines, they oppose that. God forbid you should build a new nuclear power plant. Oh, my God, oh.”

First, a Little Background

For once I actually agree with Gulliani on something. For the past four years, and even longer, the concerted effort in Washington D.C. has been to divert resources from traditional power formation over to alternative sources. This is not a new policy by any means. Remember the California black-outs? Even Washington state experiences constant power outages do to stringent power generation controls as sited in Ilana Mercer’s article “Dispatch from Third-World Washington State” where green initiatives have caused more havoc for Washington state residents.

In 2008, during the Presidential Campaign then Senators Obama and Biden circumvented the country explaining very plainly that as part of their “energy security policy” traditional resources wouldn’t play much of a role.
Joe Biden even said in 2007 in a Grist interview,

“I don’t think there’s much of a role for clean coal in energy independence, but I do think there’s a significant role for clean coal in the bigger picture of climate change. Clean-coal technology is not the route to go in the United States, because we have other, cleaner alternatives.”

Really? We do? What are these alternatives that can supply the same amount of kilowatt power as coal fired plants? Certainly not wind or solar. These alternatives are only capable of producing a fraction of what coal power can produce. Not to mention the embarrassing fact that there is no “on demand” use for these sources. When additional power is needed at peak load times, solar and wind simply cannot supply the power that is required. The result is brown outs and black outs. Just ask the residents of California.

President Obama said to the San Francisco Chronicle in January of 2008 while campaigning for the White House,

“So, if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can – it’s just that it will bankrupt them, because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.”

He made these comments in reference to “Cap and Trade” legislation. What President Obama failed to pass as legislation in Congress he did by executive fiat through regulation. Whether it’s by the EPA declaring that carbon dioxide is a poison or regulating coal fired plants into extinction. Our loss of power generation is a direct result of an over active executive branch on it’s crusade to force green energy on the the consumer. The Obama/Biden war on traditional forms of energy is plainly documented. One need only do a little internet research.

Energy: The Scarcest Resource in the Northeast

Now we fast forward to the present and look to the Northeast. Mayor Gulliani’s complains that the power grid or power infrastructure hasn’t been upgraded for decades. Why is that?

He stated,

” We operate at the limit. Now some of that is economics because it costs money to buy that excess energy, but some of it is also that excess energy doesn’t exist because we haven’t built a new nuclear power plant in 30 years. … We haven’t expanded transmission lines, we haven’t modernized. And a lot of that is because–I would call them not the environmentalists, the extreme environmentalists who oppose it and just block it completely. …”

  

 You can include the White House into that “extreme” category. In other words, what Gulliani says is that elections have consequences. Yes, there it is. The Northeast is the power base for the Democrat party and solidly votes these policies in. “Well what about the west coast?”, you might ask. No argument there. The west coast is also the power base of the Democrat party and look at the terrible mess their power infrastructure is in. These used to be localized phenomenon as we saw with the California black outs, but now that Obama and team are directing the national energy policy, everyone gets to join in the fun. 

Not Just a Coastal Issue Anymore

Michigan and Ohio (who also voted for Obama/Biden in 2008) are also experiencing their energy problems as more and more coal power generation is taken off line. The Sierra Club brags about their victories against the production of coal plants and the loss of current coal fired energy on their web page. The average power bill in the midwest has almost doubled since this war on coal started. The Institute for Energy Research reports that these price increases will cause Chicago-area electricity bills to go up $107 to $178 per year and raise annual costs for Chicago Public Schools by $2.7 million, $3.3 million for the Metropolitan Water District, and $5.4 million for Chicago’s city government. This, of course, entails increases for school millages and residents to pay more for water. They also reported that Northern Ohio can experience as much as a 60% increase in energy costs. Further, Deutsch Bank has said that prices could increase by as much as 300 percent. Ratepayers in northern Ohio are paying a high price for EPA’s regulatory agenda. Energy costs effect almost all facets of the economy. A hike in energy costs causes a ripple effect throughout all other sectors. Including anything hauled on a truck. In short, everything.

In Closing

Without a doubt, elections do have their consequences. No truer words were ever spoken. People hard hit on the east coast by the storm are really living the reality of that one. Regardless of green energy policy or “anti-price gouging” legislation these hair-brained ideas are being felt right now by flesh and blood human beings. They are certainly paying the price for their election choices.
As November 6th rolls upon us both political parties are waiting, with baited breath, to see who holds the reigns of power for the next four years. Americans are being asked, once again, to hold their noses and pick the best of two evils. That choice is left to the individual, whether alive or dead, at the pre-programmed voting machine. Personally, I will hold myself to the “Chodorov Non-Voter” position this time around. Call it what you will, I am just tired of disappointment. I cannot, with a clear conscience, vote to take one American’s earnings away and have the force of government, pocket some and then give it to another. Call it the Anti-Theft Vote.