California’s Solar Energy Fiasco

While President Obama is out gallivanting around, trying to convince everyone that climate change is going to be the death of us all unless the Unite States converts to green energy, I wonder if he is mentioning how bad the Federal Government’s massive push to move to solar power is failing in my fine state of California.

An ill-conceived and unproven solution to a problem manifested by a liberal ideology, the idea of constructing massive solar fields on public lands of California, mostly in the southern desert region were the sun shines virtually every day of the year, has not panned out so well for the administration and certainly not for the taxpayer subsidizing this flawed idea.

Solar farms are by no means a new, especially to the Southern California desert.  There were several of these facilities built in the early 1980’s however, the allure did not last long mostly due to their fiscal restraints. 

The Solar farms of the 80’s pale in comparison to the facilities that are being proposed today, a handful of which are already on-line.  These utility-scale solar plants were nowhere to be found just a few years ago but largely due to the offering of large parcels of public land; federally guaranteed loans and significant tax breaks, developers saw the potential to make money on these once risky ventures.  But as it turns out, even with free land, fast track permitting and billions of dollars in federal stimulus money, the large number of challenges these utility-scale solar plants still face has kept developers away.

Ironically, some of the greatest challenges these utility-scale solar plants encounter are environmental in nature, the largest being the damage they do to the desert landscape and those creatures that inhabit that landscape.  A solar field with an output of 250 megawatts requires a parcel of scraped land roughly 2,000 acers in size, a 500 megawatt field as much as 4,000 acres.  To put this in to perspective, a natural gas burning, 300 megawatt combined cycle combustion turbine power plant requires as few as 15 acres. 

The remote locations of these utility-scale solar plants almost always requires the construction of power transmission infrastructure, which again disrupts the landscape and natural desert habitat whereas the perspective combustion turbine type plant can be located in the middle of town, right where the power is needed, and adjacent to transmission lines thus disrupting little more than the flow of street traffic at shift change.  That is not to say all of these large facilities destroy desert habitat as some have been built on former agricultural land.  This repurposed land has already been disturbed and therefor poses no threat to any endangered species.

Capacity is another factor.  Obviously, solar plants only generate when the skies are clear and the sun is shining.  In residential and the 9 to 5 business environment, this is not much of an issue however, at the utility-scale, such plants are what keeps the grid energized for the nighttime energy consumers.  Nighttime energy usage is something that pure solar facilities are unable to accommodate.

And there is a new obstacle these large solar projects face, the calendar.  The clock is running out as the large tax breaks that are being offered to developers scale back significantly in 2016 and eventually will vanish altogether.

So where does California stand in its effort to effect global climate change?  Let’s take a look.  Following is a brief description and status of the large utility-type solar projects (100 megawatts and above) that have been approved for construction, by the California Public Utility Commission’s (CPUC), and that the developer’s commitment to move forward was enough to make a public announcement of their forthcoming construction.

 

Desert Sunlight Solar
Located near Desert Center, California, the 8.8 million photovoltaic (PV) panels generate 550 megawatts of power and cover 3,800 acres of land made available through the BLM.  The plant went into full scale operation this year.

 

Topaz Solar
Similar in physical size, output and technology of the Desert Sunlight Solar plant, Topaz went in to full commercial operation in late 2014.

 

Genesis Solar
Located east of Blyth, California, Genesis is an operational 500 megawatt solar project built on 2,000 acres of BLM land.

 

Mount Signal Solar
Originally slated as a utility-scale 600 megawatt solar field, the first phase of the project comprised of a 206 megawatt PV solar field.  Located on 2,700 acres of land on California’s southern-most boarder, near the town of Calexico, the first phase went in to commercial operation in mid-2014.  The plans were to expand the generating capacity of the Mount Signal Solar field to 600 megawatts in two additional phases but it does not appear that the expansion will happen.
 

Antelope Valley Solar Project (Solar Star)
Currently the largest solar project in California the Antelope Valley Solar Project (AVSP) is rated at 579 megawatts.  Located near Lancaster, California, AVSP is comprised of two independent solar fields located adjacent to one another.  Covering 3,200 acres of reclaimed agricultural land, the AVSP went in to commercial operation in June of this year. 

The Antelope Valley Solar Project is not to be confused with the much smaller Antelope Valley Solar Ranch, also located near Lancaster, California.

 

Ivanpah Solar
The 392 megawatt rated Ivanpah Solar Farm has suffered its share of problems.  First the desert tortoise, and then clouds (in the desert?) and even con trails from commercial jet travel.  

The 4,000 acre Ivanpah Solar plant is located on in a remote desert area on the California/Nevada border and is home to the largest Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plant in the world.  However, the facility has yet to operating at its rated capacity, in fact it falls roughly 40% short of the electrical output it was designed to produce.  The California Energy Commission released a statement which blamed clouds, jet contrails and the weather for the facilities shortfall (see link).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/17/huge-solar-plant-lags-early-production/?page=all

The desert tortoise has also played its part in the plants reduction of capacity.  Ivanpah Solar was originally slated as a 440 megawatt facility however, due to the discovery of the desert tortoise’s habitat on a portion of federal land being granted to the developer, the size of the facility had to be scaled back.

Natural gas usage has also become an issue at this solar generating facility.  That’s right, natural gas.  Ivanpah is classified as a solar/thermal plant whereas solar energy is captured and used to generate the steam needed to drive a steam turbine generator set.  Steam needs to be at a certain pressure and temperature before it can be injected into a steam turbine.  To maximize the use of the daylight hours, it is desirable to have the steam plant at operating conditions when the solar component become available.  This means a natural gas fired boiler must be put in to play.  At the Ivanpah facility, natural gas usage is quadruple that what was expected, driving the operating cost of the facility up considerably.

And the last bit of troubling news for the Ivanpah facility, to the taxpayers anyway, is that the investors applied for a $539 million federal grant to help pay off the $1.6 billion federal loan provided to the investors to build the facility.


Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One
The first of what was slated as a pair of 266 megawatt solar farms, Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One went into commercial operation in April of 2014.  The solar field is made up of 3.8 million panels covering 2,100 acres of land.  ITs sister plant has been canceled.

The Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One is not to be confused with the much larger Antelope Valley Solar Project, also located near Lancaster, California.


Imperial Valley Solar Farm
Located in close proximity to the Mount Signal Solar farm, the Imperial Valley Solar Farm (IVSF) went in to commercial operation in late 2013.  IVSF has a generating capacity of 99 megawatts.

 

Soda Mountain Solar
Still in development this 350 megawatt solar field just cleared a major environment hurdle having completed a three year environmental impact study.  A new problem as transpired however, which may cause the project to be abandon.  The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) has backed out of it agreement to purchase the power generated by Soda Mountain, stating that to do so would be too costly and damaging to the Big Horn Sheep in the area.  The developers are now scrambling to find new customers for their power.

http://www.basinandrangewatch.org/SodaMountain.htm

 

Mojave Solar Project
Located adjacent to one of the early solar facilities build just outside Hinkley, California back in the 80’s, the Mojave Solar Project is a 250 megawatt facility utilizing Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) technology to capture the suns energy and generate steam.  The project is located on an 1,800 acre parcel of land and was funded through a $1.2 billion loan guarantee from the US government.  The facility went in to commercial operation in late 2014.

Palan Solar
Proposed 500 megawatt solar field.  This project has been CANCALED!

Calico Solar
Proposed 618 megawatt solar field to rest on a 4.600 acres of land made available through the BLM.  This project has been CANCALED!

 

Fort Irwin Solar
The original proposal to develop a 500 megawatt solar project was scrapped.  The project now consists of a single “behind the fence” 2.4 megawatt solar array servicing an on-base facility.

Hidden Hills Solar
This project is comprised of a pair of 250 megawatt solar farms to be located in Inyo County.  This project has been CANCALED!

Rio Mesa Solar
To be located on 4,000 acres near the town of Blyth, the 500 megawatt solar project has been CANCALED!

 
Antelope Valley Solar Ranch Two
Meant to be a sister plant to the 266 megawatt Antelope Valley Solar Ranch One, which went in to commercial operation in early 2014, this project has been CANCALED!


There you have it, a picture of what utility-scale solar energy development looks like in sunny Southern California, the land of nearly 300 clear and sunny days each and every year.  The conditions could not be more perfect for large scale solar energy to thrive and with granted land, large tax incentives and guaranteed loans, how could any power developer pass up on such a great deal?

Of the 16 large scale solar projects listed above, five projects have been canceled; one is in jeopardy of being canceled; one has been reduced to a small “inside the fence” project; one project has been reduced in capacity by two thirds and one final project is suffering from so many performance issues that it is struggling to survive.  That leaves seven of the 16 solar farms in-tact and operational, not a real good batting average.  And the likelihood of any new utility-scale solar plants being developed in California any time in the immediate future is pretty slim as the door that led to the most attractive development opportunities is about to slam closed.

Small, “behind the fence” solar projects have achieved much greater success.  These little power packages are well fitted for large commercial spaces, they have a palatable capital investment and typically have favorable paybacks.  By no means a new idea however, with the advancement of low cost PV panel technology, these “behind the fence” projects have finally come in to their own, especially in the very green conscious state of California.  These solar projects are driven more by favorable economics than their environmental benefits, as even in mass and in their typical application, they have a very small impact on the overall carbon footprint of our nation and the world.  But as the saying goes, every little bit counts.

Residential solar is all the rage across the nation, just as it was back in the 70’s and early 80’s.  And just as residential solar did back then, the rage will be short lived.  It all looks good theory but history is destine to repeat itself.  Small companies peddling residential solar installation and maintenance will go out of business soon after the new installation surge ends.  Once federal incentives have expired, the replacement costs of these panels will not make economic sense and, just as they did 30 years ago, the neighbors will soon start complaining about those unsightly rooftop black panels that are driving the home prices down in their neighborhood.  It’s all just a matter of time.

And so, despite all of President Obama’s claims, based on what we have seen here in California, new solar energy development in the United States is not going to affect global climate change, it’s not even going to put a minor dent in it.

Global Warming - A Cause in Search of a Problem

In real science, when something is discovered that is not understood real scientists set in motion to seek out an explanation.  Unlike real scientists, environmental extremists create an agenda driven cause and then diligently seek out a problem to tie it to, no matter how scientifically unsupported it might be.

So is the case with Global Warming a cause that was set ablaze back in 2007 when the prediction was made by the now infamous climate scientist Wieslaw Maslowski and echoed by Al Gore during his 2007 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech where he stated that, due to global warming, the arctic ice would melt by 2013.  Of course this did not happen and as a result Maslowski’s team revised their model which then predicted that the arctic ice would be gone by 2016.  This despite the fact that the in 2013 the summer ice in the arctic increased from the year prior.  But a little extra ice can’t stop the environmental whack jobs who cling to any modicum of scientific data that they can force fit into their argument while at the same time eagerly discard any real science that contradicts their claim.

Certainly our mother earth is being inundated by the use of fossil fuels, nobody denies this but this does not mean the end of the world as we know. 

The doomsday scenario of global warming, constantly being projected by environmental extremists, is without scientific merit.  This however, does not stop these environmental loons from flooding their misinformation throughout social media and main stream platforms.  There hope in doing so is to gain the attention of any like minded zealot willing to ignore facts and help perpetuate their fiction.  While environmental activists are quick to claim human caused CO2 as the source of global warming they repeatedly fail to provide verifiable scientific proof as to the effect human caused CO2 is actually having on the environment, if any. 

The hypocrisy behind the global warming claim is astounding.  Typically, the argument against Republicans is that they are driven by greed {let us not forget that the left constantly claims that the right starts wars over oil}.  So why is this not the case with global warming?  If driven by greed then why are Republicans not taking a ride on the global warming bandwagon that would yield them billions upon billions of dollars by pushing green energy technologies, technologies that come without the hassles and the astronomical cost of fighting the mountains of environmental regulation and legal challenges that fossil fuels face?   The answer is simple, doing so would be irresponsible. 

If you want to get down to the science of it all, which the global warming extremists do not, the earth’s atmosphere has been in a cycle of heating and cooling for millions and millions of years.  These cycles are largely driven by the earth’s volcanic activity and is currently at the peak of one of its cooling cycles.  With roughly 150 volcanoes currently active on earth, the natural occurring CO2 emissions are at a very low cycle.  Tens of thousands of years from now the earth’s volcanic activity may be 3 or 4 or maybe 100 times greater than it is today and the natural occurring CO2 emissions will increase just has it has thousands of times before, to a level I might add that will be exponentially higher than that of our current human CO2 emissions activity.  When this happens the atmosphere will warm up ever so slightly, as it has thousands of times before, but life on earth will not come to an end nor will the ice caps melt and flood the lands.  If history repeats itself, as it has like clockwork for millions of years, what will happen is that the volcanic activity on earth will again subside, the natural occurring CO2 emissions will go down and the planet will go into another cooling cycle just as it has thousands of times before.  Of course, none of this really matters if you are buying votes through the sale of snake oil and vowing to derail the apocalyptic end of life as we know it by terminating the use of fossil fuels.

The global warming scheme serves two purposes for the left.  It of course gives them a platform by which they can demonize rational thinking Republicans and second, it ensures them the vote of the majority of environmentalist who selfishly pledge their allegiance to any candidate that sides with their cause while ignoring ever other significant national issue as well as the qualifications of the person they are backing.

Doomsdayers, such as Maslowski and our friend Al Gore, have been proven wrong in there extremist claims while the more realistic environmental scientist state that the overall negative effects on the environment, as a result of human interaction, are difficult to quantify.  The current environmental changes are fractionally small and are effected by so many naturally occurring factors, not just human interaction alone.

This by no means gives us a free pass to continue to spew toxic poisons into our earth’s atmosphere but it does mean that a more responsible and cautious approach should be taken, one driven by scientific fact rather than by extremist hoo-ha that the left leverages for political gain.

The global warming rhetoric being spewed by the large activist groups and supported by the vote seeking agenda of the political left remains to have little scientific merit.  Until there is solid proof otherwise, the responsible development of clean burning fossil fuels is the most efficient and cost effective way to meet the global energy challenges of today.

How many of the Uninsured will ObamaCare Really Insure?

“I don’t have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don’t have health insurance coverage today.  In the wealthiest nation on Earth, 46 million of our fellow citizens have no coverage.”  -  President Obama, August 2009

That same year, the Census Bureau reported that 48 million Americans lacked health insurance.

While the issue of affordability can be argued, the fact that ObamaCare did and continues to provide “access” to healthcare for those 48 million uninsured Americans remains true.  However, it was, is and will continue to be unrealistic to believe that the majority of those 48 million will ever actually gain any form of healthcare insurance coverage simply because it is mandated by law.

Yes, there has long been a group of Americans who have been denied or could not afford wanted healthcare insurance but this group makes up small fraction of the 48 million who were uninsured prior to the passage of ObamaCare.  The larger portion of that 48 million uninsured choose to opt-out of purchasing healthcare insurance on their own accord and have since shown to be just as unlikely to purchase healthcare insurance under mandate of law as the were prior to ObamaCare being enacted.

 

The Financially Secure “Opt-Outs”

Roughly 20% of the 48 million who have, in the past, chosen to “opt out” of purchasing healthcare insurance come from a group of hard-working, tax paying Americans who are financially secure.  This group of the uninsured has never been denied affordable healthcare insurance nor do they place a financial burden on the healthcare system.  This group “chooses” to pay for their healthcare needs “out of pocket” and, as a result, do not find themselves running to the doctor’s office every time they have a sniffle or a headache, a common abuse by those who have healthcare insurance.

Numbering nearly 10 million, the financially secure opt-outs have taken a much more cost effective approach to manage their own healthcare needs and, as we have experienced over the past two open enrollment periods, continue to opt-out of purchasing a traditional healthcare plan despite the federal mandate to do so.

 

The Young Invincibles

Numbering around 19 million, the young invincibles make up about 40% of the 48 million, as reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation.  While a significant portion of the uninsured, they are in large very healthy thus finding little need for healthcare insurance prior to the implementation of the new healthcare law.  Little has changed in the age of ObamaCare as this group has shown little desire to bear the bulk of the burden for the older and less healthy, by paying a disproportionate amount for healthcare insurance, a key component of the ObamaCare law. 

Like the financially secure opt-outs, this large group of the uninsured has never been denied affordable healthcare insurance.  Their insured counterparts, including hundreds of thousands of college and university students, typically took advantage of low cost “bare-bones” insurance plans that were both affordable and well suited to their particular need.  However, under ObamaCare, these well suited bare-bones healthcare plans are a thing of the past.

For those under the age of 26, the problem ObamaCare created by putting an end to the well suited catastrophic plans was mitigated though a provision in the law that allows these sub-26ers to remain on their parents insurance plans.  This provision in the law is said to have increased the number of insured sub-26ers by about 3 million, according to HHS.  For the balance of the uninsured young invincibles, they were left to purchased healthcare either from the private marketplace or though one of the state and federal healthcare exchanges.  To date, very few have done so.  They are still young, invincible and see little need to spend a large portion of their meager income on insurance that they do not believe they need.

 

Those Living in the Shadows

The homeless, addicts and other small groups of American’s that sadly live in the shadows of our society make up about 15% or roughly 7 million of the uninsured.  Most of these individuals have long been eligible for some form of healthcare assistance but for whatever reason most have chosen not to or have been unable to capitalize on these offerings.  However, since the HealthCare.gov website was launched about half of those living in the shadows have come out of the “woodwork” and have enrolled on to Medicaid.
 

Pre-Existing Conditions

Amongst the 48 million there are those that have, in the past, been denied insurance due to a pre-existing condition.  The Obama Administration did a masterful job at misleading the American people into believing that their numbers ran into the millions when in fact the number is actually quite low. 

In lieu of the “guaranteed issue” that went into effect on January 1, 2014 which no longer allows insurers to discriminate against a person having a pre-existing condition, the Pre-existing Conditions Insurance Plan (PCIP) provision was put in place.  The PCIP was a stop gap that made insurance available to high risk individuals with a pre-existing condition almost immediately after ObamaCare was passed in to law back in 2010. 

When the PCIP was being crafted, it was estimated that no more than 375,000 high risk individuals that would seek enrollment.  This, in addition to roughly 200,000 that were actively participating on 35 state operated High Risk Pools (HRP), brought the number of individuals in the pool of those with a pre-existing condition and possibly seeking healthcare insurance to 575,000.  Yet, of the 375,000 estimated to participate in the PCIP, less than one third or about 1/4 of 1% of the 48 million, enrolled on to the PCIP bringing the number of individuals with a pre-existing condition and seeking healthcare insurance to just over 300,000.  That’s a far cry from the millions the president had been touting.

 

The Semi-Low Income “Opt-Outs”

The balance of the 48 million are made up of the semi-low income “opt-outs”.  Prior to the passage of ObamaCare, this pool of about 12 million fell in to a grey area where their income was too high to qualify for Medicaid yet two low to be able to afford healthcare insurance without giving up basic necessities to live.  This created a forced healthcare insurance opt-out situation.

The expansion of Medicaid eligibility criteria has opened the door for these 12 million people, most all of which have or are expected to take advantage of the Medicaid Expansion.
 

The Numbers Fit

Of the 48 million who were uninsured when ObamaCare was passed in to law it looks as though as many as 18.5 million have or will eventually seek out healthcare insurance, mostly through the Medicaid Expansion.  The remaining 29.5 million look as though they will continue to opt-out of purchasing a qualified healthcare plan for a variety of reasons.

As for those who will continue to opt-out of purchasing a qualified healthcare plan, just as they have done in the past, the majority of the financially secure opt-outs will remain responsible for their own healthcare costs.  As well, the bulk of the young invincibles will remain healthy and without the need of costly healthcare insurance.  Those living in the shadows who remain uninsured of course will continue to be a financial burden on the healthcare system.

 

What about those Uninsured with a Pre-existing Medical Condition?

The question remains unanswered as to exactly how successful ObamaCare has been in insuring the pool of people with a high cost/high risk pre-existing medical condition and if the performance of the PCIP is any indication, the law is not helping near as much as is being claimed.

The PCIP attracted only 36% of the 375,000 participants as originally projected and over its short lifespan lost 23% of its 135,000 peak enrollment in its final year, despite rate reductions of 20%.  Additionally, 20% of PCIP enrollees failed to transfer to one of the state and federal healthcare exchanges before the PCIP provision expired, even after three extensions were granted for them to do so.

It’s hard to imagine HHS over projecting, by nearly 300%, the number of individuals with a pre-existing condition that were in need of healthcare insurance.  Even if the over projection was only 200%, this would still mean that 135,000 individuals with a pre-existing condition opted-out of the PCIP provision, this in addition to the 31,000 documented attrition and the additional 20,000 that did not transfer over to the healthcare exchanges. 

But there is no real way in knowing exactly how well those with a pre-existing condition are currently being treated by the ObamaCare law.  First, we are unsure as to exactly the number of individuals with a pre-existing condition that ObamaCare could have effected and second, there is no mechanism in place to determine a person enrolling on the healthcare exchanges was one of those individuals.  And what about the states that ended their HRP programs, how many of their enrollees found their way and purchased a healthcare plan through the healthcare exchanges?  There is no way of knowing for sure.

Eventually some group will do a study to try and determine just how many of those with a pre-existing condition ObamaCare is actually helping but for now, it looks as though far fewer are being helped that the Obama Administration would like us to believe.

 

The 2016 Open Enrollment Period Will Soon Be Upon Us

The third ObamaCare open enrollment period is just around the corner and this is a make or break for ObamaCare.

Over the 9 months that made up the first two open enrollment periods the healthcare exchanges managed to attract only about 3 million customers from the nation’s pool of the non-elderly, long term uninsured, a 70% shortfall from projection.  This leaves a lot of ground to make up in addition to another 6 million uninsured that were projected to enroll through the exchanges in 2016. 

Reaching the laws 2016 goal of reducing the number of uninsured by 16 million, through the purchase of a qualified healthcare plan, is a virtually insurmountable task, achieving even 50% of the goal looks to be out of reach.  But we must go through the motions and after the open enrollment period ends endure the countless ways the Obama Administration will try and defend an unpopular law that continues to fail to meet one of its primary objectives by a significant margin.

The FACTS of the Hillary Email Scandal

The Clinton email scandal may have broken just this past March but the facts surrounding the scandal date back to Hillary’s confirmation as Secretary of State.  Since that time a slow but steady drip of facts, which build a telling case in regards to the inappropriate use of Mrs. Clinton’s private email account and handling of the public record, has amassed.  Here are those facts!

FACT:    Facing certain confirmation as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton had a private email server set up in her home to which her private email account would reside on, an email account which she used exclusively to conduct official State Department business throughout her tenure at the State Department.  This meant that no agency within the Federal Government, or anywhere else for that matter, had access to her record and her record was not being archived.

 

FACT:    Hillary Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State on January 21, 2009.

 

FACT:    In December of 2009 the National Archives and Records Administration issue regulations requiring agencies which allowed employees to conduct official business on nonofficial email accounts to ensure those records were preserved “in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.”

 

FACT:    On the evening of September 11, 2012, the US consulate and CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya was attacked.  4 Americans lost their lives in the 8 hour attack and many more were injured.

 

FACT:    On September 20, 2012 chairman of the House Oversight Committee's Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense and Foreign Operations, Rep. Jason Chaffetz sent a letter to then-Secretary of State Clinton asking for "all information … related to the attack on the consulate {in Benghazi}."

 

FACT:    Just prior to Hillary’s departure as Secretary of State, officials at the National Archives and Records Administration were in communications with the State Department regarding plans on how they were going to go about preserving Hillary’s record during her tenure as Secretary of State.

 

FACT:    In a letter dated December 13, 2012, to Hillary Clinton, from Representative Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, he asks “Have you or any senior agency official ever used a personal email account to conduct official business?”  In the letter he also asked, “If so, please identify the account used.”  Hillary Clinton never responded to Issa’s letter.

 

FACT:    Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State was February 1, 2013

 

FACT:    Upon Hillary’s departure from the State Department, she willfully and consciously did NOT turn over any form of her record to the department or the National Archive, which is required by all senior officials in government.

 

FACT:    On March 27, 2013 the State Department responded to Darrell Issa’s December 13, 2012 letter to Hillary Clinton, which asked several questions pertaining to whether Hillary Clinton had a private email account and Department policies on the subject.  The State Department did not respond to any questions pertaining to private email accounts and gave only general answers to policy related questions.

 

FACT:    On March 29, 2013, in a letter addressed to Darrell Issa {then Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee}, from State official Thomas Gibbons, Gibbons addressed the Chairman’s frustration with the State Department’s failure to provide access to requested documents.  Gibbons wrote that the Stated Department had "provided Congress with access to documents, comprising over 25,000 pages to date, including communications of senior Department officials regarding the security situation in Benghazi,".  The documents Gibbons was referring to where those that oversight was provided only “camera review” access to in a supervised environment.

 

FACT:    On August 1, 2013 congressional oversight committee investigating the attack on Benghazi issued a subpoena to the State Department {addressed to Sec of State John Kerry} demanding that all documents that had previously been made available to oversight only in “camera review” as well as others relating to Benghazi be turned over to oversight so that they could be properly reviewed.

 

FACT:    On September 29, 2013 the House Committee on Foreign Affairs releases its report on Benghazi in which it stated:

“The State Department has refused to provide copies of critical documents to the Committee, including emails and memoranda between key officials. For over a year, it has permitted Committee staff to review them only in camera, which means that the Committee cannot maintain possession of the documents and is not allowed to make photocopies. The Department has further insisted that one of its own employees be present during limited review periods, which constrains the ability of staff to speak openly about the information. These circumstances are unique to the Benghazi investigation, and the Department has refused to offer a legal justification for its behavior.”

 

FACT:    On January 15, 2014 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence releases its report on Benghazi in which it stated:

                “Disturbing Lack of Cooperation by the State Department  -  As the Committee attempted to piece together key events before, during, and after the attacks, we faced the most significant and sustained resistance from the State Department in obtaining documents, access to witnesses, and responses to questions.”

and

“While the Committee has completed its report, important questions remain unanswered as a direct result of the Obama Administration's failure to provide the Committee with access to necessary documents and witnesses. We believe the Administration's lack of cooperation is directly contrary to its statutory obligation to keep the congressional intelligence committees fully and currently informed and has effectively obstructed the Committee's efforts to get to the ground truth with respect to these remaining questions. Too often, providing timely and complete information to Congress is viewed by the Administration as optional or an accommodation, rather than compliance with a statutory requirement.”

 

FACT:    On October 28, 2014, the State Department, for the first time, asked Hillary Clinton to return her public record to the State Department.

 

FACT:    Sometime after October 2014, but not before scrutinizing and printing out what she and her lawyer(s) determent to be the public record, Hillary Clinton made the decision to have the hard drive of her email server wiped clean thus deleting the only known and complete public record of her time served at the State Department.

 

FACT:    On December 5, 2014, attorneys of Hillary Clinton delivered dozens of boxes containing 50,000 pages of printed emails to the State Department, roughly 900 pages {about 300 emails} of which the State Department later claimed were related to Benghazi.

 

FACT:    On February 13, 2015, from the 50,000 pages provided to the department on December 5, 2014, the State Department turned over approximately 300 of Hillary Clinton’s emails {roughly 900 pages} the department deemed related to Benghazi.

 

FACT:    Sometime in mid-February, while reviewing a group of about 300 emails the State Department turned over to the Select Committee on Benghazi, investigators discovered the private email address that Hillary Clinton had been using while serving as Secretary of State.

 

FACT:    On March 2, 2015 New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt broke the story of Hillary Clinton’s home brewed email server.

 

FACT:    On March 10, 2015, while attending a UN Conference, Hillary held a press brief where she for the first time spoke publically on the matter of her private email account and private server arrangement.  Hillary stated “I feel like I've taken unprecedented steps for these emails to be in the public domain", "I went above and beyond what I was requested to do."  Hillary also stated that she did not use the server to send any classified information, and only emailed one foreign leader {from the United Kingdom} during her time at State.  Hillary also stated that her email server would remain private.

 

FACT:    In a letter from Hillary’s lawyer David Kendall to Chairman Trey Gowdy, dated March 27, 2015, in response to Gowdy’s earlier request that the Clinton email server be turned over to an independent 3^rd party, Kendall informed Gowdy that the hard drive had been erased of all emails “Thus, there are no hdr22@clintonemail.com emails from Secretary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state on the server for any review, even if such review were appropriate or legally authorized,”

 

FACT:    On June 22, 2015, the Select Committee on Benghazi released emails to/from Hillary, it had obtained during the course of its investigation, that should have but were not included in the documents turned over to the committee from the State Department thus discrediting any claim that the State Department obtains or has turned over the complete record of Benghazi related documents to the committee.

 

FACT:    On July 24, 2015 government investigators release the news that they found classified information on the private email account Hillary Clinton used during her tenure as Secretary of State.

 

FACT:    On August 11, 2015 it was revealed, by investigators, identified two emails, from Hillary’s private email account, which contained “Top Secret” information.

 
These are the facts and nothing but the facts.  What do they tell us?  We’ll that all depends on what a particular person’s interpretation of the fact are and/or, how much fiction is injected in between the facts and how politically motivated one might be to alter the facts to best suit their agenda and how many of the facts are simply ignored.

Jobs Recovery Worsens

The latest jobs numbers are in and while they came in below earlier projections, they do not look too bad, at least on the surface.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) released on Friday that 215,000 jobs were added to the economy in the month of July, down considerably from the previous 12 month average of 246,000 jobs per month.  The BLS also revised up, just slightly, the jobs numbers for the months of May and June.  Unemployment still holds steady at 5.3%.  And in other mediocre news, the “total” or U-6 unemployment rate ticked down one tenth of a percent from last month and is now at 10.3%.

So where does this put us in our quest to recover all the jobs that were lost during the recession as well as the economy’s ability to keep up with population growth, a figure I like to refer to as “jobs equilibrium”?  The news for this month's quest of jobs equilibrium is not so good. 

For the past several months our number crunching told us that we would reach a jobs equilibrium {we would have recovered all the lost jobs as well as jobs needed to have kept pace with population growth} in October of 2020.  This month however, with July having falling far short of the previous 12 month job growth average, the numbers show that the date we will reach jobs equilibrium has been extended out another five months, to March of 2021.

How did we reach this conclusion? 

Quite simply actually.  Using the BLM’s own downloadable Excel file for monthly jobs count, we established that for the 16 month period that the economy was falling into recession, prior to Obama taking office, the economy shed some 4.4 million jobs.  As well, the economy experienced an additional 2 million jobs shortfall of jobs needed to accommodate population growth over the same period.  This means that on the day that President Obama took office, there was a 6.2 million jobs deficit, as a result of the recession.

Going forward we assumed that for each month following an additional 125,000 jobs needed to be created to accommodate the continued population growth, a figure we added to each of the following month’s jobs number extracted from the same BLS Excel file.  Using this very simple methodology, we are able to keep tabs on the jobs deficit as the new jobs numbers come in each month.

To project forward we use the average jobs number of the most recent 12 months and of course we continue to consider that there will be an additional 125,000 jobs needed each month to keep pace with population growth.

What does this all mean?

It means simply that there are not enough jobs being created nor are they being created fast enough to achieve jobs equilibrium any time soon.

For the first time ever, more than 93 million Americans, the age of 16 and older, are not participating in the labor force.  This has pushed the labor force participation rate to a 37 year low of 62.7%.  And as we have just experienced this past July, where the number of jobs created fell well below the past years monthly average, the overall jobs recovery situation has worsened.

In order to achieve jobs equilibrium while President Obama is still in office, starting immediately, the average monthly jobs growth would have to jump to 525,000, which is well more than double the current average.  This pace would have to be maintained through Obama’s final month in office to achieve this goal.  This of course can never happen.  But for the next president, whomever he or she may be, if they wish to reach jobs equilibrium during their first term in office, they are really going to have to step up jobs creation considerably.