Final Notice: Edgewood Council Candidate Forum




showcasing all three candidates for Edgewood Town Council will take place at 6pm on Thursday February 27 at the Masonic Lodge.  Moderators will be Rory McClannahan, Editor and General Manager of The Telegraph, and Leota Harriman, Editor and part owner of The Independent. Incumbents Rita Loy Simmons and Chuck Ring and candidate Mike Turner will answer questions from the moderators and written questions from the audience after the break.  This is a great time to listen so that you can make an informed decision on March 4 at the ballot box.


Continued: No Schools Closing


EDITOR: As promised, here is additional information regarding the previously requested closure of Edgewood Elementary and Mountain View Elementary.

The following is a copy of correspondence Secretary of Education Hanna Skandera sent to the Moriarty-Edgewood School District Education Board President, Mr. Todd McCarty and  the district’s superintendent, Mr. Tom Sullivan.

The letter is self-explanatory and needs no clarification:


Enhanced by Zemanta

Edgewood Municipal Election Campaign 2014



Edgewood Municipal Election Campaign 2014

It is that time again. I currently serve as a councilor on your Edgewood governing body, and have done so since 1999, except for a two-year hiatus. During the two years I was absent from the town council, I remained active working hard to improve Edgewood’s financial well-being while planning serious town projects for future benefit. I was re-elected to a new four-year term in 2010 and it is that term which will end this coming March 4th.

During the preceding four years I have been privileged to work with a dedicated council eager to see Edgewood become the community it seems destined to be. Roads have been paved and maintained far beyond what had occurred since Edgewood was first incorporated. During the last four years your governing body built a public works facility which allows your dedicated employees to maintain road and similar equipment under the comfort of heated space or cooled space depending on the need of the seasons. The town governing body, its staff and our volunteer planning and zoning commission, formulated a renewed plan for Edgewood Commons (also known as section 16) which along with revised zoning and sub-division ordinances will become the guide for Edgewood Commons and some other areas in our community.

Edgewood’s Police Department is under new direction by your police chief Fred Radosevich. Improvements in supervision and other facets of the department’s operation have been made and will continue to be made during the future. During the coming years, Chief Radosevich will make training, equipment and personnel additions to see our department keep pace with the needs of a safe community. I retired as Captain in charge of the New Mexico State Police Criminal Division in 1985. Prior to my retirement from that agency I attended and graduated from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Academy, the Drug Enforcement Agency’s Academy and obtained accreditation at the Executive level of New Mexico’s Law Enforcement Academy. The training and accreditation will continue to be helpful in ensuring Edgewood has fully trained and professional police as the governing body seeks to assist our Chief of Police.

Edgewood has been fortunate to have the Mountain & Valley Family Health Care Facility (FCFHC) here since 2003. What came as a 7800 square foot medical, dental and mental health services facility has outgrown its present space and plans are to construct a new health commons of approximately 42,000 square feet with an urgent care component, and other ancillary services, such as a community wellness center open to the community. The facility presently employs over fifty dedicated providers and staff. Total employment will reach over 100 once the new facility is completed. We believe the facility will continue to partner with the University of New Mexico in medical provider training.

Edgewood recently joined with the Edgewood Chamber of Commerce (ECC) in formalizing a memorandum of understanding allowing ECC to organize as Edgewood’s primary economic development organization. ECC is organizing for recruitment of businesses, services and other vital needs with economic components. We expect to see firm results though ECC’s efforts.

I have served on various committees during my tenure as a town council member and currently (Since 2003) serve as a “consumer” member of FCFHC Board of Directors. I continue to serve .on the Northern Region Transportation District Board of Directors which provides transportation to and from Edgewood with a mid-day service to be added soon.

I currently hold certification as a graduate of the Municipal Officials Leadership Institute under the auspices of the New Mexico Municipal League and I will continue to improve my knowledge and efficiency with in-service training.

I humbly ask for your vote during this election cycle ending March 4th. In turn, I will continue to serve you with honesty, integrity and full dedication.


Charles (Chuck) Ring

Edgewood Town Councilor


Enhanced by Zemanta

MESD Plans Special Meeting on 2/6/14


MESD Is holding a special meeting on 2/6/14. Parents, community citizens and leaders should plan to attend.  Click on the link below to access the agenda.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Minimum Wage VIA NM Constitutional Amendment — Very BAD Idea


EDITOR: Mr. Crawford is back with his common sense and intelligence.  Perhaps he can hand-off some of both to the legislature (to those lacking both). The work below is Mr Crawford’s and it is very much appreciated.

Following are comments on SJR13 made to the NM Senate Rules Committee for hearing on 2-3-14.   SJR13 can be found here.
Later Jim

——– Original Message ——–

Subject: Oppose SJR 13 Annually Increasing Minimum Wage
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 15:11:58 -0700
From: James Crawford <>
To: Linda Lopez <>, Daniel Ivey-Soto <>, Jacob Candelaria <>, Stuart Ingle <>, Mark Moores <>, Gerald Ortiz y Pino <>, Cliff Pirtle <>, Sander Rue <>, Clemente Sanchez <>, Michael Sanchez <>

I am opposed to SJR 13 to annually increase the state minimum wage based on CPI indexes and to make increases retroactive back to 2009.

First of all, I oppose this  session’s wild flurry of constitutional amendments to enact legislation that should be the responsibility of the legislature and governor and are not structural problems with the NM constitution.  The constitution provides overall guidance and it should be very difficult to amend and only rarely happen.

The proposal is to amend Article XX which has nothing to do with wages and does not mention anything about minimum wage.  Minimum wage determinations should be the business of the legislature and governor and not a constitutional issue.  The legislature sets the minimum wage which is not specified in the constitution.  With the retroactive payment and any future increases businesses will be forced out of business and/or reduce hiring.

If the CPI declines, the minimum wage will not decline accordingly.   If the movement of CPI is a legitimate index for the minimum wage it should track down as well as up.  In other words this bill is just a way to blindly raise the minimum wage level every year no matter what happens to the cost of living.

Minimum wage and automatic increases end up hurting the very employees the bill claims to help.  A tiny portion of the work force works for minimum wage and they quickly advance if they are competent.  Workers are paid based on their productivity.  Badly needed entry jobs for young people and unskilled people will dry up.  Wage increases for other workers will be under pressure to increase causing more business and job losses.  There will be no net increase in spending power since the extra wages have to come from somewhere and will result in higher prices overall and wage earners purchasing power will remain relatively the same.

This is a bad idea in any form and is a travesty as a constitutional amendment.  All aspects of minimum wage legislation should remain with the legislature and governor and not be locked into the constitution.

Thank you,
James Crawford

Thanks to Jim Crawford and others of like mind, we might  head this off at the stupid gate!



Enhanced by Zemanta

Sig Silber: What Would NM Look Like As A Nation


I hope everyone will read the article found below and take seriously what may happen to this great state.  There are serious issues with which to deal. If people of this state continue to lollygag around, we could find ourselves without a viable economy.  There is already a serious rumor Intel will leave in 18 months, there is always a danger Los Alamos and Sandia could shutdown with little warning and some of our military installations could be candidates for the dustbin.

I’m sure there are other options which will not bode well for this large state with the small economy.  We thank Mr. Silber for allowing us to use his work and unless he pulls permission for our use you can expect much more from him on this blog, and others maintained by us and other conservative organizations.

Mr. Silber’s article was originally published in The Global Economic Intersection or

English: Seal of New Mexico

English: Seal of New Mexico (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Nation of New Mexico

January 21st, 2014
in Op Ed, syndication

Random Thoughts from the High Desert: What if New Mexico became an Independent Nation with its own Central Bank?

Written by

The land area which today we call New Mexico was part of the new nation of Mexico until it was basically seized In 1848 and became the United State Territory of New Mexico in 1850 and a State in 1912. It is the fifth largest state by land area in the U.S and has abundant natural resources. I am not advocating secession but simply wondering what the implications of nationhood would be for the people of New Mexico. Also this is an exercise in understanding how states within the U.S. are in many ways similar to nations within the Eurozone i.e. those Members of the European Union which do not have their own currency but instead use the Euro.

When considering the impact of being a separate nation one way to begin is to ask what the pros and cons are of so doing. The table below is one way of looking at it.



1. More flexibility in deciding on the legal framework under which one is governed.

2. Separate currency facilitating adjustment of competitiveness without waiting for wage rates to adjust

3. Ability to increase or decrease the money supply

4. Perhaps increased borrowing power since debts become sovereign debt

1. Relinquish or need to renegotiate aid from existing Federal sponsor

2. Need to assume certain functions currently performed by the existing Federal sponsor.

3. Increased vulnerability to foreign attacks.

4. Increased vulnerability to anything that impacts the economy of part of a smaller nation.

How does New Mexico fit within the above framework?

First of all let us look at the data on the transfers of taxes to the Federal Government and the receipt of funds from the Federal Government. For New Mexico, it looks like this:

Federal Taxes 1990-2009, $bn

Federal Spending 1990-2009, $bn

Taxes minus spending, $bn


2009, $bn

Federal taxes minus spending. 1990-2009, as % of 2009 GDP

New Mexico






The fact that New Mexico is substantially supported by the rest of the U.S. is very apparent. Thus New Mexico can not afford to lose its Federal sponsor. This sponsor provides essentially $5B a year to New Mexico over and above tax receipts received from New Mexico taxpayers which is equivalent to our State General Fund.

Some of the Federal spending is for two National Labs and multiple military installations which we could do without but currently provide income for many New Mexico residents. I have not gone through the exercise of netting out those Federal Expenditures which are in some ways intended to benefit the entire U.S. not just New Mexico so perhaps they can be subtracted from the receipt of funds to New Mexico.

But we have many other funding requirements including the management of forests and other Federal Land, management of many of our reservoirs, assistance to Native Americans, social security payments, Medicaid funding, etc. In many ways, New Mexico is not really a State but a very expensive Territory for the U.S. to maintain.

So New Mexico can not afford to be an independent nation. When you are too small to survive, one solution is to get larger. So what about what the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) calls the “Southwest” which is Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Arizona.

The send/receive ratios for the Southwest and other states are shown in the following map:
Source: Census Bureau; International Revenue Service;The Economist estimates

Because the map is difficult to read if printed in black or white, I have also included a table of the data in that map for the states of the Southwest.

Federal taxes 1990-2009,$bn

Federal spending 1990-2009, $bn

Taxes minus spending,$bn

GDP 2009,$bn

Federal taxes minus spending, 1990-2009 as % of 2009 gdp

New Mexico






























Uneven Economic Performance

But even if the sends and receives from the former Central Government would be essentially balanced out in the new Nation of The Southwest, the relative performance of the four economies have recently diverged as shown on this map.
source: Census Bureau

You can clearly see here the recent poor performance of New Mexico and Arizona as compared to Oklahoma and Texas. Thus we could easily see a difficulty emerging between a prosperous East Southwest and a deflationary/depressed West Southwest. In some ways the Southwest might resemble Europe.

Of course we know why Oklahoma and Texas are doing well. It is called fracking and horizontal drilling. These are concepts which are culturally anathema to many in New Mexico and Arizona so that could be an obstacle to confederation. But a good public relations campaign might overcome this and there exists some uniform culinary preferences of the residents of the Southwest and similar attitudes towards oppressive Central Government.

There may even be some reason for thinking that part of the northern tier of Mexico might fit in nicely with this new possible nation. There already exists pretty much free movement of people back and forth across the border between Mexico and three of the states in the Southwest. There is also considerable integration of the river and reservoir systems between the Southwest and Mexico. There is also to some extent for a substantial part of the population of the Southwest a shared language, religion, and cultural values. But I will leave the expansion of the discussion on the potential merger of the Southwest with part of Northern Mexico for a subsequent article.

We may want to look at some other characteristics of this potentially new nation.


Land Area Square Mile

Popu-lation 2010 Census in 1000s

Annual Precip-itation in inches

Proved Oil Reserves 2011

Millions of Barrels





Personal Income tax rate single person moderate income %

Sales tax state plus local


New Mexico



































About the same as Mexico.


Did not calculate

Did not calculate

Total U.S.



Conti-nental U.S. 30

Perhaps 20 – 25 Billion

Overall the New Southwest would have generally lower personal income tax rates but higher sales tax rates than the residual U.S. This would tend to create income inequality. As sales taxes are regressive and low income tax rates often are associated with higher property taxes. To be complete I should have considered corporation tax rates.

Access to Federal lands would provide Southwest with a substantial amount of land currently owned by the U.S. Federal Government. This includes over 61 million acres or approximately twice the size of New York State. This might but would not necessarily spur development and increases in property tax receipts. U.S. control over subsurface oil and gas extends in some case beyond the amount of surface land owned by the U.S. and many minerals such as gold and silver are controlled by the U.S. Federal Government with the ability of citizens to stake and patent claims.

A small percentage but still significant amount of Federal Land is used as military installations and if these military installations and their equipment were included with Southwest, it would be among the World’s major nuclear powers which is not surprising since the atom bomb was developed and tested in New Mexico.

How this land became Federal Land is interesting as to some extent it is land stolen from the Mexican settlers who became U.S. Citizens as a result of conquest by the U.S. of Northern Mexico. In the case of New Mexico the ownership of land was by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hildalgo intended to remain with those living in the conquered land but key entrepreneurs and other scoundrels enticed the Federal Government to essentially steal the land from the Hispanic citizens. This is a process that continues to this day.

The Central Bank of the Southwest.

There are many reasons to have a Central Bank. Many nations in Europe have learned the hard way what it is like to not have a Central Bank, not be able to issue currency, and to depend on a Central Bank over which you have very little control.

Although one could argue that the major benefit of having a Central Bank is the ability to generate money out of thin air which can often be convenient, perhaps the major benefit of having a Central Bank is to have ones own currency. For the Southwest I have decided that our currency will be called the Desert Tortoise or Tortoise for short. For some short time there would be interchangeability of one Tortoise per U.S. dollar. After that transition period, the Tortoise would float against all currencies.

The advantage of having ones own currency is that it is a lot easier to adjust in a world market by having ones currency appreciate or decline in value relative to other currencies than it is to have price levels adjust to allow one to achieve a balance of trade.

It does not matter whether this is trade with another nation or trade with another state. Well it would not matter except if one was receiving subsidies or paying subsidies or other transfer payments to allow ones trading partners to be able to afford or tolerate their relationship with you.

The U.S. provides foreign aid to Egypt and Israel among others and we have examined earlier in this article the very different ratios of money sent to D.C. versus what is returned.

One way or another, everything that enters a state within a nation or a nation must be paid for. That payment can be by money, borrowing, or seizure. To the extent it is money, workers must be willing to work for sufficiently low wages to make their products attractive to ones trading partners and wages must be sufficiently attractive to entice workers into the labor force. The U.S. is doing a poor job of handling this balancing act. Perhaps a smaller unit such as the Southwest would be able to achieve better performance.

There are many reasons to manipulate ones currency but a major reason is to impact your trade surplus or deficit. Some explanation of this is provided below:

Economic Variable Impacted by Current Account

Current Account Deficit

Current Account Surplus

Savings Rate as Compared to Investment Rate






Household Income






Interest Rates



GDP Growth



Thus the devaluation or currency appreciation is the use of currency adjustments in lieu of other mechanisms to manage the trade balance. This occurs both naturally in the marketplace and by policy i.e. the Central Bank of the Southwest which I would structure to be a full service bank i.e. it would deal with both the state chartered banks and individual citizens. Thus if there was a need to stimulate the economy of the Southwest, there would be the usual option of stuffing money into the banks but also the option of bailouts directly of residents.

  • Too much foreign debt denominated in Tortoises, devalue the Tortoise.
  • If wages are too high, devalue the Tortoise.
  • If too much hot money is entering the Southwest, cause the Tortoise to appreciate.

It is not clear what the trade balance of the Southwest would be. In terms of manufactured goods and food it would be a net importer. On the other hand, it would be a significant net exporter of energy for now hydrocarbon based but long term to include solar and wind energy.

Presumably part of the motivation would be to improve the economy of the Southwest and create job opportunities and a better qualified work force than exists currently. This means enlightened fiscal and monetary policy. In general monetary policy is more effective than fiscal policy so having a Central Bank and ones own currency is critical.

This of course only will work relative to the Residual U.S. and the rest of the World. It would not address imbalances within the Southwest.

Without the ability to have a currency that adjusts relative to the relative competitiveness of the Southwest relative to the residual U.S. and the rest of the World, adjustments would have to be made by prices rising or falling to avoid non-competitiveness.

But there remains the issue of legacy debt. Some residents of the Nation of the Southwest would owe money to others denominated in U.S. Dollars and some would own loans denominated in U.S. Dollars. So devaluing or appreciation the “Tortoise”,the new currency of the Southwest, would have certain implications. In general it is likely that the Remaining U.S. will be in a debtor position relative to the citizens of the Southwest who own U.S. Treasury obligations and will be exempt from any obligations with respect to the U.S. National Debt which clearly would not be very popular in D.C.

Economic Potential of the Southwest

Between the arid settings, mountain air, and saltwater locations, the potential for providing medical services, and tourism as well as being a retirement destination all of which is facilitated by having abundant low-cost land, the economic growth potential of the Southwest would appear to be significant.

As just one example, it might be able to become a healthcare center especially if the U.S. were to accept Medicare claims filed with the Southwest or under current rules ( there may be opportunities to develop medical centers close to the borders of the Southwest with the Residual U.S. Providing free or highly discounted medical services to U.S. Legislators might lead to the proper rules being put into place.

And the nation of Southwest might easily become an onshore/offshore sanctuary for those concerned about the safety of their U.S. Dollars.

As an aside, secession is not the only way to create economic subregions within the U.S.. States can cooperate and negotiate Interstate Compacts that supersede State Laws and are enforced by the U.S. Supreme Court. It is not out of the question to create regional currencies and there may be other ways to achieve the same benefits without having separate currencies i.e. indexing of compensation of government employees to the trade balance of the region to make adjustments less difficult than the current process of using Detroit-style financial collapse to force a decline in labor rates.

With respect to governance, the concept of dividing Texas into a larger number of smaller states might have some appeal. Texas at one time might have had that right as part of their Treaty with the U.S. when they joined the Union but apparently they have over time surrendered that right and it is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution. But of course that would no longer be a constraint within a new nation of Southwest.

Border security is an issue partly related to the large amount of U.S. owned land and sparsely settled Native American land near the border with Mexico in New Mexico and Arizona.

This New Nation of the Southwest would have many miles of shoreline along the Gulf of New Mexico including deep water ports. But border security would be a problem. Here is what the situation looks like today.

Source: U.S. Geological Survey Jacquieline v. Notan, Cartographer 21 September 2011

The large amount of Federally Controlled land complicates achieving border security in Arizona and New Mexico. Decisions on the former Federally held government land would have to be reviewed to determine the best use of this land. I have to assume that the citizens of the Southwest would prefer to have those decisions made locally rather than in Washington D.C.

We may want to look at some of the other chacteristics of this potential new nation.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Marita Noon: A Serious Threat Or Something Similar


Thanks to Ms. Noon for another thoughtful article.


I’ve been in Washington DC for the past week and have meetings on Capitol Hill Monday morning. (Expect future columns to reflect the new information I’ve gathered and new contacts made.)

Here on Sunday afternoon, I have a gap and thought I’d take advantage of the opportunity to get this week’s column out to you early. Unfortunately, due to the unpredictable nature of travel, while I completed Climate change: A serious threat (attached and pasted-in-below) yesterday afternoon and thought I’d sent it to my proofreader, she didn’t get it. I was out, but was able to jump through a few hoops and get it to her—and then, she got it to me and I sent it on to After all the extra effort that went into getting everything worked out to get Climate change: A serious threat done, I was so disappointed to have awakened in the middle of the night to check on it, only to discover it wasn’t posted. This happens every now and then. I trust, as is usually the case when this happens, it will be up at midnight. All that is to explain why I’ve not included a link at the top as I usually do.

Again, due to my travel schedule, I leaned heavily on a friend and climate change expert for this week’s column: Bob Endlich. We started with a piece that was written by Richard C.J. Somerville, climate scientist at the University of California, San Diego Institution of Oceanography. His op-ed was published in newspapers from coast-to-coast. It was so filled with false information that we couldn’t resist exposing the lies. We had fun putting Climate change: A serious threat together. I hope you find it to be a valuable weapon in your climate change arsenal—which you need because climate change is a serious threat (be sure to check out the links in the last paragraph)!

Please post, pass on and/or personally enjoy Climate change: A serious threat.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       Marita Noon, Executive Director

Energy Makes America Great, Inc.

PO Box 52103, Albuquerque, NM 87181


Commentary by Marita Noon

Executive Director, Energy Makes America Great Inc.

Contact: 505.239.8998,

Words: 1380

Climate change: A serious threat

The current cold covering a large portion of the country has, once again, brought out the climate change alarmists with claims of “serious threat.”

Due to his respected position, as climate scientist at the University of California, San Diego Institution of Oceanography, Richard C.J. Somerville’s recent “Cold comfort” column was published in newspapers throughout the country.

In it, he grouses that the public doesn’t take the “consequences” of climate change seriously—pointing out that they are “here and now.” He cites: “only 54 percent of the public sees it as a global threat to their countries—and only 40 percent of Americans do.”

Somerville suggests: “people either are scientifically illiterate or reject science when it conflicts with their core values or religious convictions.” He posits: “the medical profession and communication experts may have much to teach those climate scientists” because “Priming patients to appreciate the value of medical diagnostic tests has been shown to make them more likely to take these tests and then act on the results.”

What Somerville misses in the analogy is that the data backs up the medical case. For example, getting a mammogram catches breast cancer early and increases survival rates. The data has shown that medical science is correct.

On the contrary, the data doesn’t support the claims made by climate scientists—but they just keep making them. Apparently they believe the “big lie” propaganda technique used so effectively by Adolf Hitler.

In Somerville’s column, he offers several familiar, easily disproven statements:

  • “Low-lying areas are threatened by sea-level rise” which will result in “millions of environmental refugees” and
  • “Major threats to agricultural productivity as rainfall patterns change and as heat waves, floods, droughts and other weather extremes worsen.”

Because my expertise is in communications not climate, I reached out to someone who could help me: Robert Endlich—who does in fact have both the education and experience. Endlich, who served as a USAF weather officer for 21 years and holds a BS in geology and an MS in meteorology, offered me pages of data and documentation, which I’ve summarized for my readers.

Environmental Refugees

If the threat of “environmental refugees” sounds familiar, it should. The 2005 UN Environmental Program forecast 50 to 100 million climate refugees. A UN report by Norman Myers: “Environmental Refugees, an Emergent Security Issue,” presented at the 13th Economic Forum, in Prague, May 23-27, 2005 predicted: “The environmental refugees total could well double between 1995 and 2010,” and “When global warming takes hold, there could be as many as 200 million people overtaken by disruptions of monsoon systems and other rainfall regimes, by droughts of unprecedented severity and duration, and by sea-level rise and coastal flooding.” His report was accompanied by a map, indicating areas to be impacted by sea-level rise.

In early 2011, Gavin Atkins asked: “What happened to the climate refugees?” In his Asian Correspondent post, he used census records to show that the populations in the low-lying areas predicted to “flee a range of disasters including sea level rise” had actually grown—including no fewer than the top six of the very fastest growing cities in China.

Based on both in-person observation and historic evidence from Western Europe, Endlich has made a study of sea level rise. Citing geological features such as stream meanders upstream of Pisa on the Arno River and new shorelines on the coast of the Ligurian Sea, and history, he told me: “What may be news to many is that there is widespread evidence in the Mediterranean Basin and the English Channel coast that sea levels in Roman and Medieval periods were significantly higher than at present. The Roman port of Ostia Antica, the port at Ephesus, now in Turkey, and Pisa have histories showing the Mediterranean Seas significantly higher than today’s sea levels.”

Endlich continued: “In 1066, William the Conqueror defeated King Harold at the Battle of Hastings. Less well-known is when William landed, he first occupied an old Roman fort now known as Pevensey Castle, which at the time was located on a small island in a harbor on England’s south coast. A drawbridge connected castle to mainland. Pevensey is infamous because unfortunate prisoners were thrown out this “Sea Gate,” so that their bodies would be washed away by the tide. Pevensey Castle is now a mile from the coast—further proof of higher sea levels fewer than 1000 years ago.”

The glacial-interglacial temperature data from the past 400,000 years shows each of the previous four interglacials significantly warmer than at present. In fact, a careful analysis of the ice cores from East Antarctica, published as a letter in Nature, shows that maximum temperatures from previous interglacials were at least 6C/10F warmer than present-day temperatures, with CO2 values then about 280 PPM, and today’s values near 400 PPM. Leaving one to ask: “if CO2 is such a strong cause of warming, why is it so cold today?”

Worsening weather extremes

Somerville stated: “The consequences include major threats to agricultural productivity as rainfall patterns change and as heat waves, floods, droughts, and other weather extremes worsen.” Endlich shared the following with me:

Heat Waves: Dr. Judith Curry, Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology offered Senate testimony on January 16, 2014. She showed an analysis of 982 stations from the U.S. Historical Climate Network for the 48 continental states with more than 80 years of record.  The data show a strong peak of record maximum daily temperatures occurred in the 1930s, with no increasing trend in the post-WWII years when CO2 started its modern increase.

Of the 50 states, the number of state maximum record temperatures obtained from NOAA’s National Climate Data Center, by decade, shows that in the 1930s, 23 states set their all-time high temperatures, by far the largest number of such record highs. There has not been a single state record maximum set in the 21st Century.

Droughts: The most-often used indicator of drought is the Palmer Drought Severity Index. Curry’s testimony included a PDSI chart, showing the most severe droughts in the 102-year record 1910-2012, were in the 1930s and a lesser maximum in the 1950s. Data show no indication that drought severity has increased as CO2 has increased.

Floods: Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., from the University of Colorado, testified to the Senate EPW Committee on July 18, 2013. With respect to floods, he provided data from the US Geological Survey, which show in the U.S., floods have not increased in frequency or intensity since at least 1950, and that flood losses, as a percentage of GDP have dropped by about 75% since 1940, based on data from NOAA’s Hydrologic Information Center.

Somerville says that increasing CO2 will harm plant productivity, but the opposite is true.  First, realize that both plants and animals, including humans, are carbon-based life forms. With increasing CO2, there is an incredible array of beneficial effects spelled out in the book, The Many Benefits of Atmospheric CO2 Enrichment, by Craig Idso and Sherman Idso. The benefits include: increasing water-use efficiency; increasing biomass in roots, stems, flowers and nectar; larger seeds; avoiding human starvation and plant and animal extinctions; stimulating early plant growth; and resistance to plant diseases. The carbohydrates we consume when we eat are derived directly from CO2 in the atmosphere; carbohydrates are the source of the energy we need to survive and thrive.

Climate scientists, such as Somerville, do have something to learn from the medical profession: if you want people to heed your warnings, they need to be backed up by the data.

Somerville’s climate refugees cannot be found. In the recent past, interglacial periods were at least 6C/10F warmer than the present with a lot less CO2 in the air; and the Minoan, Roman and Medieval Warm periods were significantly warmer than at present. By historic accounts, sea levels were many feet higher as recently as 1066 and 1300 AD. His claims of heat waves, floods, drought and agricultural disruption are easily disproven by looking at real-world data.

Somerville’s argument points out: “climate change does involve serious threats.” The serious threat is the Obama/Podesta partnership pushing the executive order pen to punish people with new policies that kill jobs and increase energy costs all in the name of supposedly saving the planet.


The author of Energy Freedom, Marita Noon serves as the executive director for Energy Makes America Great Inc. and the companion educational organization, the Citizens’ Alliance for Responsible Energy (CARE). Together they work to educate the public and influence policy makers regarding energy, its role in freedom, and the American way of life. Combining energy, news, politics, and, the environment through public events, speaking engagements, and media, the organizations’ combined efforts serve as America’s voice for energy.

Related articles

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Permanent Press To Wrinkle Our Permanent Fund


A “permanent press,” on the legislature to dip or pump from New Mexico’s permanent fund continues from those believing money is the answer to our dismal ranking among the fifty states in education of children.  The following is posted with permission of the New Mexico Business Coalition.  Take it seriously … it contains sage advice.

The Truth About New Mexico’s Permanent Fund:  The NM State Land Grant Permanent Fund currently provides about 15% of the state’s general fund.  According to Doug Brown, a former State Investment Council Vice Chairman and current Dean of UNM’s Anderson School of Management, without money each year from the permanent fund, New Mexicans would be paying at least 15% higher taxes.  Read more HERE.

Why Do People Trying to Raid the Permanent Fund Hate our Children?  Billions of dollars have been spent over the past years under the heading of ‘Head Start’ and other early childhood education titles.  Yet our children’s educational success ranks at the bottom of the nation. 

At a recent New Mexico Business Coalition (NMBC) event in Albuquerque, Mark Meckler, President of Citizens for Self Governance, talked about New Mexico’s Permanent Fund asking “…what happened to all the money that has been wasted and all the lives that have been destroyed….” by those now wanting to raid the permanent fund?  See the video HERE.


Mafia Tactics by Partisan Leaders:  Some elected officials and Sam Bregman, the Chairman of the Democratic Party, have declared raiding New Mexico’s Permanent Fund their top priority for the 30-day legislative session.  Many are using tactics like pushing for a constitutional amendment, which the Governor cannot veto, and THREATENING any legislator who gets in the way. 


Senator John Arthur Smith responded to the threats from Sam Bregman: “…he doesn’t believe there’s any place for an individual that is trying to be financially responsible.”   Read more here.

DON’T TOUCH THE PERMANENT FUND:   The 5.75 percent annually withdrawn from our permanent fund already exceeds a maximum 5 percent cap that prudent states and economists recommend for preservation of the fund.  New Mexico absolutely cannot allow raising the level of distributions, if we want to provide for our children’s future educational needs.

If left alone, the fund will continue to grow and distributions will increase by more than the amounts currently sought by progressives, who obviously do not care about our children’s future.

CALL TO ACTION:  We urge New Mexicans to take a stand against harming our children’s future!  Please call or email all legislators, especially those serving in leadership of both chambers and tell them “DON’T TOUCH THE PERMANENT FUND.”

Mary Kay Papen, Pro Tempore
Michael S. Sanchez, Majority Floor Leader
Stuart Ingle, Minority Floor Leader
Timothy M. Keller, Majority Whip
William H. Payne, Minority Whip

W. Ken Martinez, Speaker of the House
Rick Miera, Majority Floor Leader
Donald E. Bratton, Minority Floor Leader
Antonio “Moe” Maestas, Majority Whip
Nate Gentry, Minority Whip



Join the NMBC NOW
— We Have A Membership Category For Everyone.

P.O. Box 95735, Albuquerque, NM 87199, United States
You may unsubscribe or change your contact details at any time.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Conspiracy Brews 1/25/14


If you like your coffee and your politics flavorful, served with a heaping dose of civility by a diverse group of interesting people from all parts of the political spectrum then you should be joining us every Saturday.  Started in 2007 over coffee and lively conversation by a group of concerned friends and neighbors, ‘Conspiracy Brews’ is committed to finding solutions to some of our State’s toughest problems. Our zest for constructive political discourse is only equaled by our belief that the only way forward is to exchange our views in a relaxed and friendly setting.   For additional information or to be added to our e-mail list contact:

Conspiracy Brews  


Not your average political discussion group!

January 25, 2014

9:00 AM - 12:00 PM
Southwest Secondary Learning Center

10301 Candelaria Rd NE
(northwest corner of Candelaria and Morris)

We think that government should be open and honest at all times.
People from all political parties are welcome.

 *** Quotes of the Week ***

“That you may retain your self-respect, it is better to displease the people by doing what you know is right, than to temporarily please them by doing what you know is wrong.”

William J.H. Boetcker

“You can’t do anything about the length of your life, but you can do something about its width and depth.”

Evan Esar


Suggested Topics


– Who do you see winning the senatorial seat in NM…Udall, Clements, or Weh…and why?

 – Is NM in a death spiral and what can we do about it?


 – Who do you trust?



 (Light Quotes of the week)


“On my income tax 1040 it says ‘Check this box if you are blind.’  I wanted to put a check mark about three inches away.”

Tom Lehrer

“A committee can make a decision that is dumber that any of its members.”

David Coblitz

“The human race is faced with a cruel choice:  work or daytime television.”


Enhanced by Zemanta