Reprinted from the House Committee on Natural Resources

Ripped from the Headlines…

Higher gasoline prices could stall recovery, Obama’s re-election, Boston Herald, 2/21/12

“By summer, some analysts said, you could be paying $4 for a gallon of gas, almost as high as the record set in the summer of 2008. A price that high could cripple the still-fragile recovery…The average price for a gallon of regular gas in the Midwest was $3.41 last week, up 32 cents from a year ago and $1.59 more than the day Obama became president…In Los Angeles, the price of regular unleaded already is $4.93 a gallon and premium $5.09 at some gas stations, and the escalating fuel costs are expected to ripple throughout the economy, affecting everything from groceries to air fares.”

Obama’s gas-price spike, Washington Times Editorial, 2/20/12

“Here we go again. Gasoline prices are rising rapidly and already have shattered the $4-a-gallon mark in California. Industry analysts say the all-time national average record of $4.11 could be shattered this summer…This latest gas-price jolt is predictable. President Obama has done much to impede the supply of petroleum products to consumers. Most particularly, he exploited the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico as an excuse to clamp down on oil drilling in the Gulf and also along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts.”

Surging gas prices threaten to derail economic recovery, LA Times, 2/20/12

“Just as the recovery is finally looking real, surging fuel prices are once again looming as a major threat to the financial health of U.S. consumers and the broader economy…Nationally, drivers started this week paying on average $3.565 for a gallon of regular gas, up more than 5% in the last month…many consumers remain on edge, burdened by heavy debts and very cautious about spending. With high unemployment…analysts say the U.S. recovery remains highly vulnerable to external shocks, perhaps none more so than a surge in gas prices.”

Gas price spike pumping up fears, Chicago Tribune, 2/20/12

“Fears of $5 per gallon gasoline are in the back of some motorists’ minds, jeopardizing the nascent economic recovery…Whether they break a record or not, rising gas prices could stunt the nation’s sluggish economic recovery. Economists say that higher oil prices may have crimped retail sales…The new economic worries are eerily reminiscent of what happened about this time a year ago when political turmoil flared in Egypt and elsewhere in the oil-rich region, sending crude prices sharply higher for months.”

Oil jumps to 9-month high after Iran cuts supply, AP, 2/21/12

“Oil prices jumped to a nine-month high above $105 a barrel on Monday after Iran said it halted crude exports to Britain and France in an escalation of a dispute over the Middle Eastern country’s nuclear program…Iran’s Oil Minister Rostam Qassemi had warned earlier this month that Tehran could cut off oil exports to “hostile” European nations. The 27-nation EU accounts for about 18 percent of Iran’s oil exports.”

As part of the American Energy Initiative, House Republicans last week passed H.R. 3408, a bipartisan plan that will remove government barriers to American energy production, create over 1.2 million jobs, help lower gasoline prices and strengthen our national and economic security. The bill would expand offshore energy production, open less than three percent of ANWR for oil and natural gas production, encourage the development of 1.5 trillion barrels of oil shale in the Rocky Mountain West, and require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve the Keystone XL pipeline within 30 days. 

RINO Romney is falling in the polls. This photo shows then Gov. Romney signing his own ObamaCare bill with the corrupt Senator Ted Kennedy looking on.

The CBS affiliate in the Dallas/Fort Worth area is reporting that Rick Santorum has a 45% support among Texas Republicans. This is more than double of Newt Gringrich who is now in second place in Texas at 18%. Romney is at 16% and Ron Paul is two points behind at 14%.

Just two weeks ago, Romney was polling at first place in Texas.

If Santorum wins Texas, it would give him most of the state’s 155 delegates, boost his momentum and help with his fundraising efforts. The Texas primary is on May 29.  

The primary in Michigan, however, comes on February 28. Santorum currently leads Romney 37 to 33% in Romney’s home state. Romney father was once governor of Michigan. In Michigan, polling has Gingrich at 10% and Paul at 15%. Super Tuesday is on March 6.

According to CBS:

Super Tuesday is March 6th, and the big state up for grabs is Ohio.  The latest poll there shows Santorum with an 18 point lead over Romney, 42 to 24.  Gingrich has 13 percent and Paul 10.

Our friends just to the north in Oklahoma also vote on Super Tuesday.

Santorum leads a new Sooner Poll out Monday. Santorum has 39, Romney 23, and Gingrich 18.  Paul has 8.

Read more at CBS – Dallas/Fort Worth.

Donate To Santorum’s Campaign Through GINGPAC!

RICK SANTORUM NOW THE LEADER– In January, before the Iowa GOP caucus, GING-PAC endorsed Senator Rick Santorum for the presidency. At the time I made several points about his opponents. I stated that Mitt Romney would not be able to defend the mandated health care system he instituted in Massachusetts when he was governor there, and that he was just not a lifetime conservative who had lived and breathed the cause as did Rick Santorum. I also wrote that former Speaker Newt Gingrich actually had been on more sides of more issues than Mitt Romney, and that when his record was exposed his support would collapse. Newt Gingrich supported centrally planned mandates to force people to buy insurance for twenty years, far longer than Romney. Both Gingrich and Romney have supported the radical environmentalist “cap and trade” taxes.

Rick Santorum and William J. Murray

In the January, 2012 Campaign Update I wrote about how I had worked directly with Rick Santorum while he was in the Senate, when he had set up the International Religious Freedom Caucus to aid persecuted religious minorities, particularly Christians in majority Muslim nations.

I received a storm of letters and e-mails from people telling me that it did not matter that Rick Santorum was the true conservative in the race, that they were going to support a “winner.” I was lectured by an untold number of people as to why it was important to back Romney because he had plenty of money to run, and why I should support Gingrich because he did a better debate showing than any of the others. In some letters I was told that Romney “looked presidential” and that was the best reason to vote for him.

In the January Campaign Update I asked supporters to send me checks made out to Rick Santorum for President so I could “bundle” them and give them to the campaign. I received three checks totaling $100.

I stuck with Rick Santorum because he is the true conservative in the race.

As of today Rick Santorum is number one in the national polls. In Mitt Romney’s home state of Michigan, Rick Santorum has a double digit lead. Romney has been forced to buy $2 million in negative mud slinging advertising against Santorum in Michigan to try to save himself from the embarrassment of being defeated by as much as 15 points in his home state. I predict this will not help, and that Santorum will still beat Romney in Michigan.

About the only state in which Newt Gingrich still leads Santorum is Georgia, the state Newt Gingrich represented in Congress, and that race is getting tight. While Rick Santorum used what money he could raise to run his campaign, Newt Gingrich borrowed millions and has virtually no money in the bank to even buy ads in Georgia. He has to rely on the TV ads placed by a Las Vegas billionaire who made his money on gambling. Think about that for a few minutes. 

The entire GOP establishment, plus Fox News, has been pushing Mitt Romney. This is their argument: “We need a moderate to win in November.” REALLY?  Is this why we now have a President McCain, because moderate Republicans do better? Is this why moderate Senator Bob Dole beat Bill Clinton? Is this why Ronald Reagan lost? Is this why George W. Bush lost when he ran as a conservative? Oops! There was no President Dole and there was no President McCain.

When there is no clear distinction, the people vote for Democrats. If Obama is going to get knocked out in November it is going to take a conservative who has clearly different positions and a clearly different direction for the nation. Mitt Romney and his “Romney Care” and Newt Gingrich doing environmental protection TV ads with Nancy Pelosi just don’t make a clear distinction. Rick Santorum is the true conservative and he can beat Barack Obama.

Just as I did last month I am going to ask you to help GING-PAC elect Rick Santorum as president. There are several ways you can help

First, social network fund raising is done at a site called Fundly.com. I have set up a personal page at Fundly.com/RickSantorumforPresident79 that includes a video message from me, endorsing Rick. One hundred percent of the funds raised there go to Rick Santorum’s campaign. The nice thing about Fundly.com is that you can then share your donation on Facebook and that encourages others to donate as well.

Second, donations can also be given at his home Internet site. I am a registered “bundler” with the Rick Santorum campaign and my initials are the code to let the campaign know I sent you there. To give directly at this site go to: RickSantorum.com/WJM. 

Third, checks can be written directly to Rick Santorum for President and sent either to GING-PAC or directly to the campaign. If you send your checks to GING-PAC we will “bundle” them every week and send them for special handling at the campaign headquarters. This lets Rick know that we are working for him. (Election laws do not allow us to tell a candidate or his campaign what we are doing on his behalf in advance.)

Fourth, you can send funds to GING-PAC that we will use to promote independently the campaign of Rick Santorum. As an example, back in 2008 GING-PAC called every known pro-life voter in South Carolina and Georgia, asking them to vote for Mike Huckabee. We could do that again for a candidate such as Rick Santorum, but we have to have the funds on hand.

Every four years we hear the talking heads on television say that an election will “determine the future of America” or that it is the “most important election since Abraham Lincoln” or something to that effect. It is true that virtually every election changes the direction of the nation somewhat, but this election is truly different.

In the last three years Barack Obama has increased the debt of this nation by more than did all previous presidents combined. He has implemented new rules, using executive orders, to make sure that our nation will be dependent on oil from Islamic nations for decades to come. He has done true damage to the social fabric of the nation by promoting homosexuality while at the same time drastically increasing Islamic immigration. The nation can’t survive four more years of Obama.

It is my promise to you that Government Is Not God – PAC will work full time to defeat Barack Obama and his cronies in the Senate who want to “fundamentally change” the United States into their vision of a utopia – which will be a dream life for them but a nightmare for the people.

This is the hard truth: GING-PAC needs more than $10 and $20 contributions in 2012. To fight the one billion dollars Barack Obama intends to spend, we need some real money as well. Please consider a contribution of $100 or more this month to GING-PAC.

With your contribution to GING-PAC you can also include a separate check made out to Rick Santorum for President, and I will deliver it to him with other checks from GING-PAC supporters. Thank you and God bless you

William J. Murray, Chairman 
Government Is Not God – PAC 
P.O. Box 77237, Washington, DC 20013

This is good news for social conservatives. It shows that Santorum is now the most viable candidate to defeat Obama in November.

According to the WSJ:

For months, the Obama campaign and its Democratic surrogates have kept a tight focus on Mr. Romney, believing the former Massachusetts governor stood the best chance of capturing the nomination.

But after Mr. Santorum’s surprise victory in Colorado, Missouri and Minnesota last week, Obama campaign aides have been rethinking whether a Romney-centric approach still makes sense, campaign advisers said Thursday.

While other Republicans, notably Newt Gingrich, have risen to challenge Mr. Romney in recent months, Mr. Santorum looks to be a candidate whose appeal isn’t about to fade, they said.

Mr. Santorum “doesn’t come with the type of political baggage that Gingrich had,” said one Obama adviser. “He has the ability to go farther and is much more likely to be a potential nominee.” Directing attacks against Mr. Santorum is “under discussion at the headquarters” in Chicago, he added.

Expect the Obama sleaze machine to go full throttle to smear Santorum for everything from his sweater vests to his family members.  

Hodgan Gidley, a spokesman for the Santorum campaign noted: “Rick Santorum is doing well in the polls, so Barack Obama is going to try to tear apart Rick Santorum … instead of building up his own record.”

Obama can hardly run on his record of successes or his record of honesty. Obama is well-known to be a serial liar and deceiver who can only win by tearing down and destroying his opponents. Obama will undoubtedly use all of his Saul Alinsky-style training to destroy Santorum.

Being targeted by Obama’s Chicago political machine is a form of flattery, but it is going to get very ugly, very soon for Santorum, his family and his campaign staff. Keep them in your prayers – and support his campaign through GINGPAC.

President Obama is sending America on the road to serfdom as fast as he can.

Reprinted from WorldNetDaily 

DOCTOR’S ORDERS

Exclusive: William Murray applies Hayek’s ‘Road to Serfdom’ to health-care mandates

By William J. Murray

The mandate drafted under Obamacare which forces church organizations to purchase health-care policies that provide for contraceptives and sterilization and abortifacient pills is just one small step toward Barack Obama’s hard-left goal of establishing a centrally planned society. The effect of the health-care mandates is more far-reaching than even critics first reported.

Under Obamacare, standards are set by bureaucrats, and all insurance policies must supply mandated services. Most likely the issue of contraception was the opening shot for Obama and his administration to soften up the opposition. The goal is rationing of care according to the “quality of life.” The quality of life concept is a leftist central planning goal that calls for “defective” babies to be aborted and care to be withheld in end-of-life situations to save government funds. As with central planning in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, health care will be available only for those who can continue to contribute to society. Moral issues are forgotten as they are not central to government.

Most conservatives point to Friedrich von Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom” in the context of defending free enterprise. For example Rep. Paul Ryan is an expert on the works of Hayek and the economists of the Austrian School. But the thrust of “The Road to Serfdom” was not economic, but rather the loss of liberty under central planning. On moral issues Hayek wrote:

“What our generation is in danger of forgetting is not only that morals are of necessity a phenomenon of individual conduct but also that they can exist only in the sphere in which the individual is free to decide for himself and is called upon voluntarily to sacrifice personal advantage to the observance of a moral rule. Outside the sphere of individual responsibility there is neither goodness nor badness, neither opportunity for moral merit nor the chance of proving one’s conviction by sacrificing one’s desires to what one thinks right.”

At its heart Obamacare is a worst-case scenario of central planning, putting aside not only the will of religious organizations, but the self-determination of individuals as well.

There is no law forcing church organizations to supply contraceptives; this provision is not in the massive Obamacare law pushed through by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid. The mandate for contraceptives is a “rule” written by the Health and Human Services Department under the authority of the original bill. Obamacare gives HHS the authority to mandate virtually anything regarding health care. In the extreme, HHS could order that all costly attempts to save premature babies be stopped. Medicare already mandates that costly medical care for the elderly be restricted.

There are lists of approved Medicare services, and doctors may not prescribe anything that is not on that list for Medicare patients. This same central control is now becoming obvious in Obamacare. Central planning is not limited to just ordering individuals to buy insurance.

Going back to Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom”:

“If the law says that such a board or authority may do what it pleases, anything that board or authority does is legal – but its actions are certainly not subject to the Rule of Law. By giving the government unlimited powers, the most arbitrary rule can be made legal; and in this way a democracy may set up the most complete despotism imaginable.”

Pay close attention to this portion of the above quote: “… a democracy may set up the most complete despotism imaginable.”

Canada is defined as a democracy, but there is virtually no freedom of speech in that nation. Individuals have been fined for letters of opinion sent to newspapers. The courts there forced one man who was publicly critical of Islam to work in a mosque as public service. Democracy and liberty are not synonymous. It could be possible for an individual to have greater personal liberty under a monarchy than under a democracy whose bureaucrats have been given unlimited rule-writing powers.

The problem of the loss of liberty through central planning goes beyond Obamacare. Our Congress has abdicated its responsibility in many areas, giving the authority to bureaucrats to write “rules” that have the force of law, “rules” that if violated can bring about not only fines but prison time. The Environmental Protection Agency has jailed innocent land owners for such crimes as cleaning garbage from their property.

Oddly, conservatives have aided in the rush to central planning. Republicans in Congress have sworn off “earmarks,” thus giving Barack Obama and the bureaucrats the full authority to spend trillions of dollars a year as they see fit without congressional oversight. It is now Obama who decides which states get new bridges, not the Congress. Apparently, tea-party members believe that having Obama decide where to spend trillions of dollars is better than the “corruption” of congressmen trying to bring jobs to their districts. The tea party is unwittingly assisting in the creation of even more central planning.

The problem with Obamacare is not Obamacare. The problem stems from both major political parties moving away from the concept of individual liberty and toward central planning, whether it is George W. Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” or Barack Obama’s attempt to control medical care for the entire nation from one central location in Washington, D.C.

We must heed the warnings of Friedrich von Hayek and dismantle the central planning monster we have created in Washington before it devours the last of our liberties.

William J. Murray is the chairman of the Washington, D.C.-based Religious Freedom Coalition and the author of seven books including “My Life Without God,” which chronicles his early life in the home of destructive atheist and Marxist leader Madalyn Murray O’Hair, the woman who filed the lawsuit removing prayer and Bible reading from America’s public schools. Having lived the Ayn Rand lifestyle, he has a unique prospective of the political candidates.

Vanderbilt Law Professor Carol Swain

Vanderbilt University officials have put all religious groups on notice that they have until April to comply with the new non-discrimination policy or face non-recognition as a legitimate campus organization.  Vanderbilt held a Townhall in late January to explain why the policy is being enforced.

Among those facing non-recognition is the campus chapter of the Christian Legal Society. At issue is whether religious-based campus groups can require their leaders to agree to a set of faith requirements.

In a recent interview with Kim Colby, Senior Council for the Christian Legal Society, she explained that the new non-discrimination policy means that Christian organizations cannot expect their leaders to be Christians or adhere to the group’s beliefs.

She says that there are currently four religious groups that are on provisional status – meaning they haven’t been banned yet from the campus — but are not yet officially recognized. “By mid-April, all 380 student groups must submit their constitution and by-laws to be recognized for the following year. The big question is what’s going to happen to the groups that are on provisional status – whether they’ll be recognized.”

“Without recognition, it’s nearly impossible to exist on campus,” according to Colby. Campus recognition brings with it a variety of benefits, including funding and access to the university’s communications system. Religious groups may be driven off campus by the non-discrimination policy.

In early February, Colby sent a letter to the Vanderbilt Chancellor and the Vanderbilt Trustees to present them with a simple solution to the conflict between religious groups and Vanderbilt. It is to revert back to the original policy, which was in place until a year ago. The letter reads, in part:

“The current impasse between religious students and the Administration would be easily resolved if a single sentence were placed in both the University’s written nondiscrimination policy and the affirmation form: ‘A student organization whose primary purpose is religious will not be denied registration as a Registered Student Organization on the ground that it limits membership or leadership positions to students who share the religious beliefs of the organization.’

“Restoring the status quo that prevailed at the University until ten months ago, this statement reflects the common sense understanding that religious groups should have leaders who share the groups’ core religious beliefs.”   

***

Expecting religious groups to accept nonreligious leaders is unreasonable: Ten months ago, several religious student organizations were told that their constitutions, which had been approved in prior years, were no longer acceptable and that they must submit new constitutions in order to retain recognition as student organizations. The organizations submitted revised constitutions in an attempt to meet the Administration’s demands without compromising the integrity of their religious beliefs. Nonetheless, their approval was “deferred” for the 2011- 2012 academic year.

The Administration withheld approval based on the groups’ practice, common to many religious groups, of requiring their leaders to affirm that they share the groups’ core religious beliefs. By way of example, the Administration informed the Christian Legal Society student chapter that its registration was deferred because its revised constitution provided that “[e]ach officer is expected to lead Bible studies, prayer, and worship at Chapter meetings.” The Administration stated: “This would seem to indicate that officers are expected to hold certain beliefs. Again, Vanderbilt policies do not allow this expectation/qualification for officers.”

The letter reached the Chancellor, but Colby isn’t sure it was delivered to the Trustees, who met last week. So, far the administration has been unwilling to accept the solution proposed by CLS. The University of Florida has such a sentence in their non-discrimination policy, provided by CLS. “Basically, we’re asking for a return to the status quo, until it was changed a year ago. We’d like to see it affirmatively in writing. They haven’t been willing to so far. We’re hoping the board will say this is a reasonable request. This is a controversy that Vanderbilt really doesn’t need. It is making Vanderbilt look hostile to religion. Vanderbilt alumni, students and donors are unhappy with the policy.”

Colby says at least one out of six Vanderbilt students is in a faith-based group of some kind. “We know that some donors have not given as a result of this controversy.”

Vanderbilt Law Professor Carol Swain is a faculty advisor to the Christian Legal Society campus chapter. “I feel like it’s going to be a long time before this issue is resolved,” said Swain. “As of now, I don’t see any evidence that this issue will be revisited.”

She believes that if Vanderbilt stays with its current policy, it will “mean that the CLS chapter will have to leave the campus.”

Professor Swain says the non-discrimination policy has been framed about the issue of gay rights, and that it reflects something the leadership has wanted to do. “When I look at the directive that the Obama Administration sent to university administrators last spring, asking them to encourage interfaith activities on campus, I think it could possibly be traced back to that. The kind of interfaith activities they’re encouraging would downplay differences. For the conservative Christian organization, one of the differences would be the belief in a biblically moral lifestyle.”

Swain isn’t convinced that Vanderbilt will do the right thing and revert to its old policy that provided religious freedom for campus groups. If Vanderbilt digs in its heels, all religious groups will either be driven off campus or will cave to the policy – thus being forced to admit individuals into leadership positions who reject the faith tenets of the group.

Rick Santorum with supporters in Idaho on February 14.

Rick Santorum is now the favored candidate in Ohio and would win the primary if it were held today.

A Quinnipaic poll of 553 registered Republicans shows that Santorum is at 36%; Romney at 29%; Gingrich at 20% and Ron Paul at 9%.

There are three weeks left until the Ohio primary and half the Republicans said they might still change their minds.

Of those polled, 74% said they thought Santorum’s conservative credentials were about right and 7% said he wasn’t conservative enough. Forty-eight percent said Romney wasn’t conservative enough, while 41% said he was about right.

Read more at Cleveland.com.

Support Rick Santorum’s campaign through GINGPAC!

Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO)

Missouri Senator Roy Blunt had harsh words for President Obama’s unprecedented attack on religious liberty through ObamaCare. He spoke at the Heritage Foundation on February 13.

The contraception mandate being forced on religious institutions is an attack on religious liberty and the “faith-based rights of conscience,” said Blunt.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote of Blunt’s speech:

Today, Sen. Roy Blunt, who has spearheaded opposition in Congress, signaled that the issue will remain high on the list of GOP talking points despite  White House efforts to quell the storm. “I think this will continue to be part of the debate unless the president totally changes his position…The more you look at the second statement, the weaker it becomes as it relates to really changing,” Blunt, R-Mo., said in a noon-time speech at the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington.

Blunt is being viewed by conservative leaders as prescient given that he introduced a piece of legislation last August called the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, a proposal that grew out of his concern about the reach of the new health insurance law. His bill, which aims to nullify rules like the contraception regulation, has drawn 36 co-sponsors; only one, Ben Nelson, of Nebraska, is a Democrat… Last week, Blunt sought a Senate vote on his legislation but was denied by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who advised that participants in the debate need to “calm down.”

Blunt said in his speech today that “Americans don’t need to calm down. This is a debate that is as fundamental as the First Amendment to the Constitution.”… For the immediate future, Blunt promises to speak out frequently while trying to persuade people that this is about religious freedom and matters other than contraception, some of them much larger than any government rule. “This is about who we are going to be as a nation,” Blunt said in his speech. “The president, I think, seems to look at this and other issues like America is like everybody else.”

Watch his speech!

Rick Santorum has won three primaries this week!

Public Policy Polling reports that Rick Santorum is now in the lead for taking the Republican nomination for President of the United States.

Santorum is now at 38% compared to Romney at 23%, Gingrich at 17% and Ron Paul at 13%.

Santorum also has a high popularity rate of 64%. Only 22% see him negatively.

Romney’s popularity rate is at 44% positive; 43% negative. That’s a 23 point decline from the December poll.

According to Public Policy Polling, Santorum is “now completely dominating several key segments of the electorate, especially the most right leaning parts of the party.”

Read more at Public Policy Polling!

Donate to Santorum’s campaign! Let’s get him nominated and elected as President to replace Barack Hussein Obama.

Rick Santorum at Oral Roberts University

From CBN News:

A recent Gallup poll shows 20 percent of Republicans now support Rick Santorum as their party’s nominee for president after his three-state sweep of contests on Tuesday.

It means the former Pennsylvania senator is now tied with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who has been losing support. Both candidates still trail former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who holds 36 percent of support. Santorum just completed a two-day tour of the Bible belt states of Texas and Oklahoma.

In McKinney, Texas, he spoke to an audience of church pastors. At a stop in Tulsa, Okla., he spoke at Oral Roberts University, where he told the audience his GOP competitors don’t seem “particularly comfortable” talking about faith issues as he does.

Read more at CBN News.

p>