All the Other Stuff

Michigan’s February Unemployment Rate Redux

When You Fiddle Data Series, Fiddle All The Correlated Data Series

George Orwell-During Times of Universal Deceit
Remember the startling unemployment announcement from the Michigan Department of Management, Technology, and Budget (DTMB) last month?

  • That Michigan’s February 2015 seasonally adjusted (SA) U-3 unemployment rate had dropped to 5.9% from January’s 6.3%?
  • That the 5.9% February 2015 SA U-3 unemployment rate was down 1.9% from Michigan’s 7.8% February 2014 SA rate?
  • That 88,000 more ‘seasonally adjusted’ Michiganders were working in February 2015 than one year earlier?
  • That the not seasonally adjusted (NSA) 12 month increase in Michigan employment was even better at 101,000?

Well, there is a little problem with these goal-seeked, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) X-13ARIMA-SEAT massaged unemployment statistics. They simply are not true.

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

Clash of Titans, A Right Plan of Action

RightMI Counterattacks!
Part IV – A Right Plan of Action

So how should average middle class Michiganders engage in this electricity debate? What should they demand in the 2015 legislation on electricity? Can they prevent the titans from looting their family budgets?

First and foremost, Michiganders should demand an end to hybrid deregulation. All electricity consumers should be under the same regulatory scheme, with equal options to escape. No favoritism. This aligns the interests of politically potent, large electricity consumers with those of the average Michigander. This creates an effective counterbalance to the political power of the utilities; political power purchased with your electricity payments. Even full regulation is preferable to our current hybrid deregulation scheme.

Michiganders should further demand full deregulation of our electricity market. As regulated entities, utilities have a ‘cost plus’ mindset which relentlessly drives prices higher. Regulatory bodies limit themselves to dampening this drive for higher prices, but do not drive efficiencies which would genuinely control energy costs. Competition-driven efficiencies are very important to Michigan’s economy, which still has a significant, energy-intensive industrial base. Also Michigan’s utilities have not demonstrated any special competence operating their electrical power stations, so competition in the supply of electricity will promote best practices there and lower costs as well. Ultimately, a deregulated grid properly managed is more tolerant of supply shocks because more actors will be supplying the electricity.
wind turbine fire close-up
The RPS should not be renewed at any level. Renewables should not be forcibly subsidized by any ratepayers, overtly or covertly. The current PA 295 regulatory scheme has residential electricity consumers subsidizing renewables through skyrocketing rates, while large consumers escape this burden.  As renewable energy sources become cost effective, they will be welcomed by all parties.

If environmental wackos want their own electricity to come from RPS renewables, let them pay the full cost including base load backup costs. Most renewable sources are intermittent and require expensive base load backup capacity for periods where they cannot generate electricity. The Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO) historical record shows that Michigan wind power, by far the most significant current RPS component (883 turbines, about 58% of RPS power), was only available 31.5% of the time (termed ‘capacity factor’) during 2011 and 2012. During two months, July and August of 2011, wind was available only available 16% of the time. Most evaluations of the cost effectiveness of wind and solar generation pointedly neglect the costs of base load backup capacity to keep the lights on.  Essentially, wind power capacity has to be backed up by 100% of its rated capacity with fossil-fueled base load capacity to prevent blackouts during zero wind periods, so why bother install wind power (or solar, for that matter) in the first place?  Ratepayers subjected to RPS get to pay the capital costs for twice the generating capacity they actually need.

You Betcha! (15)Nuh Uh.(1)

Clash of Titans, Viewed from Below

King Kong 1
Part III – Clash of Titans, Viewed from Below

Fortunately, the greed political acumen of DTE and CMS Energy is coming to your rescue. Both utilities are seeking full reregulation of Michigan’s electricity market. They are issuing thinly veiled threats about brownouts ‘reliability’ of supply unless Michigan forces the fortunate 10% back into our utilities’ waiting arms. And with President Obama’s hobbling of coal-fired power stations ramping up, they actually have a point. So the fortunate 10% will have to seriously reengage in Michigan’s electricity rate debate or their electricity costs will skyrocket.

The environmental wackos haven’t been idle either. The new model, term limited, Governor Snyder has evidently made up with our ur-RINO and is now endorsing a 40% RPS by 2040. To keep Michigan’s serfs in line – and avoid impeachment – he is specifically not calling for this to be a mandate, rather calling it a ‘goal’. Coming from Michigan’s Governor, this is a distinction without a practical difference. Snyder appoints the three MPSC commissioners who oversee electricity policy and MPSC operates under the aegis of LARA. Think Governor Duggan, Snyder’s designated successor, will change this policy? Other Michigan politicians are splitting the difference, proposing RPS mandates intermediate between 10% and 40%.

You Betcha! (14)Nuh Uh.(0)

Clash of Titans Coming to Michigan

After Proposal 1, After Plan B, Electricity Front and Center

godzilla-biollante
Part I: Background

Later this year, Michigan’s electrical utilities are expected to satisfy the 10% Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) requirements of PA 295 of 2008. Partial reregulation of electricity in Michigan under the same PA 295 of 2008 denied choice of supplier on 90% of electricity consumption, while exempting large, politically potent, electricity consumers. At the same time, the U.S. EPA is progressively tightening their noose around the neck of the coal industry with an array of ever more restrictive regulations upon coal-fired power plants. A political clash of titans is looming in Michigan.

Taken together, these circumstances will trigger a wild four-way donnybrook pitting electrical utilities, electricity consumers, and environmental wackos against one another later this year. But this is only three parties, so why do you say four-way? Large industrial consumers have substantially escaped the consequences of PA 295, while smaller Michigan consumers – including residential consumers – have experienced the fifth highest rate of electricity cost increases in the nation. These two electricity consuming groups’ interests do not coincide.

You Betcha! (14)Nuh Uh.(0)

Say No To Proposal 15-1 Rally April 15

Opposing proposal 15-1 are the overtaxed citizens from BOTH sides of the spectrum.

Traverse City-Protest

Photo from actual Traverse City Protest.

It could possibly be an unusual gathering April 15.

Given the fact that most conservative Republicans and the left-of-center Democrats agree that the May 5th proposal is an unmitigated disaster, its possible they might actually walk side by side at 11AM in Front of the Traverse City Post Office on Tax Day. If one watches the polling results, follows through by reading the comments on the major media pro 15-1 shill attempts, one might walk away thinking the only the political class centrists are the ones who really really want this garbage.

Holding breath on working together? Not entirely.

However, what a treat it would be to shove this bad medicine down the throat of the cronyist Snyder and his milquetoast minions.  The mantra of there being “no plan B” is worn out already.  Putting taxpayers into a corner might elicit thoughts of the wolverine that is threatened once this play is done.  Higher taxes hurt the left as much as the right, and passage of this boondoggle is a constitutionally guaranteed increase of taxes every single year.

Where:  In front of Traverse City Post Office on Union and State St. 
When:   11 am till 1 pm or as long as you can.  April 15th tax day (Depending on size we may walk to the Parkway and Union St.)     Appropriate signs please.

If you are in the area on April 15 at 11AM, join 15-1 opponents to say NO to higher taxes.

You Betcha! (26)Nuh Uh.(1)

“All those in favor say ‘Aye’. Any opposed? Seeing none, the motion is approved.”

This is not the time for chutzpa!

If our elected representatives in Lansing are in need of any suggestions to “find” money to reallocate towards more important matters affecting Michigan, a local vote that was taken yesterday afternoon by an advisory committee would be my recommendation for a great place to start.

{Story continues below}

You Betcha! (9)Nuh Uh.(0)

Citizenship – The Conclusion

" .. Immigration policy should first benefit the citizens and lawful residents of the United States. "

presidentReflection on the 14th amendment along with historic reference in parts I and II.

Wrapping up with the conclusion, we have a treat. Fuscaldo answers the questions many have had about a recent high profile announcement.  Enjoy!

Conclusion

An essential part of United States immigration policy is based on the executive branch’s current practice of extending birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are either illegal aliens; a temporary nonresident alien (guest worker) living in the United States, or aliens lawfully in the country for a limited time and purpose.

This practice has never been authorized by any statute or court decision. There is no Supreme Court decision squarely holding that children born in the United States to illegal aliens or temporary nonresident aliens (guest workers) living in the United States are automatically citizens of the United States.

You Betcha! (11)Nuh Uh.(2)

Citizenship? Part II

AnchorIn Citizenship? Part I, Fuscaldo begins to discuss the 14th amendment.

We continue his essay with executive law, congressional acts, and some historic background.

by James Fuscaldo (continued)

Executive / Administrative Policy on Birthright Citizenship

Advocates for granting automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens or temporary nonresident aliens (guest workers) living in the United States always focus on the first requirement of birth.They allege birth on United States soil alone guarantees United States citizenship. These advocates also argue that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” simply means being susceptible to police authority (i.e. being required to follow American laws, pay fines for violations and be subject to the police powers of the Federal and State Courts). This interpretation creates a redundancy in the Fourteenth Amendment.

Why?

All people born in the United States are subject to the laws of the United States. Accepting the argument that the phrase, “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”, simply means subject to police power turns a critical and carefully written Citizenship Clause of the Constitution into a redundancy. It also gives the Clause an interpretation that is contrary to the recorded Congressional debate before its adoption, and to the principles of legislative construction and interpretation.

You Betcha! (10)Nuh Uh.(1)

Citizenship? Part I

We can continue to ignore the intent to clarify what constitutes being a citizen or ..

Anchor-BoyWe continue to have a problem.

The people who violate our sovereignty are here.  The children of immigrants are assumed to be a way to maintain an illegal presence in our country by these invaders from foreign lands.  In that process, the constitution is used to serve excuses for the law breaking.  Michigan attorney Jim Fuscaldo clarifies a few things in “A Citizen’s Primer on the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

By James J. Fuscaldo

Introduction

James Madison said, “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

Congress is debating the need for comprehensive immigration reform. The reason is to deal with illegal immigration; manage the growing number of illegal immigrants in the United States, and create an equitable path to permanent residency and citizenship for all illegal immigrants and their families in the United States.

An essential part of United States immigration policy is based on the executive branch’s current practice of granting birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are either illegal aliens; a temporary nonresident alien (guest worker) living in the United States, or aliens lawfully in the country for a limited time and purpose.

Birthright citizenship is not authorized by the Constitution or congressional legislation. It has not been validated by any Supreme Court or Appellate Court decision. Constitutional scholars and eminent jurists have studied the historical record; the congressional debate before its adoption; the case law pertaining to the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and its association with our English Common Law heritage.  They have concluded that granting birthright citizenship to children born in the United States whose parents are either illegal aliens or temporary nonresident aliens (guest workers) living in the United States, or aliens lawfully in the country for a limited time and purpose is not supported by the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Before analyzing the historical significance and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment it is incumbent on us to first consider a review of the Thirteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 as evolutionary precedents for the Fourteenth Amendment.

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(1)