Tag Archives: Bob Dole

A Day Of Reckoning For Our Political Leaders

By Floyd Brown

We already know that Congress is on a never-ending quest to meddle in our affairs.

They control everything ­­– all for the sake of their own filthy politics.

And since the free market is no exception, the actions of these madmen often result in higher prices for the consumer (you).

It’s sick, really. And it’s been going on for decades.

Let me explain…

A classic example involves the special tax breaks and mandates for ethanol.

Every few years, Congress has a big fight over ethanol. And the real victims of the battle are our cars’ engines – and our wallets.

This isn’t exactly a new issue, either.

40 Years Dirty Politics Come to Light

It all started in 1973 when OPEC declared an oil embargo against the United States in response to our support of Israel during the Yom Kippur War.

Instantly, oil prices rocketed from $3 to $12 a barrel.

Soon, America’s neighborhood gas stations were saturated with cars waiting to fill up. Gas lines and rationing became the order of the day.

After the embargo ended, Congress set out to cure America’s addiction to fossil fuels – especially gasoline – and ethanol swiftly became the go-to fuel source.

In 1978, Congress passed a tax break for ethanol-blended gasoline. Following this, the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments mandated the presence of an oxygenized chemical compound in gas – thus giving ethanol a huge boost.

Then in 2005, Congress upped the ethanol mandate through new renewable fuel standards (RFS). At filling stations, we now pump gasoline that is up to 10% ethanol.

The problem is that the existence of such a gigantic program in support of ethanol has distorted the market. And we’re the ones who end up suffering at the pump.

So why do these mandates still exist?

The True Price of These Mandates

Well, there’s one group that’s strongly in support of these mandates: corn farmers.

They’d have you believe that the preferential taxation of ethanol is good for consumers. And it keeps prices down when oil prices are high.

Of course, nearly all of American-made ethanol is derived from corn. So the ethanol mandates elevated the demand for corn.

As a result, corn prices climbed, and farmers benefitted.

And making corn farmers happy is a great way to win elections–it’s why we see near unanimous support for ethanol amongst presidential prospects.

I learned this when I worked on Bob Dole’s presidential campaign in Iowa (which is essentially ground zero for corn politics). I was sent out right away to meet with the president of the National Corn Growers Association to ask for an endorsement. And this ultimately helped Dole win Iowa.

Indeed, the all-important caucuses in Iowa, where Barack Obama got his start, are vital to any presidential campaign.

I know. All of this political back-scratching is infuriating to say the least. Had the government never stuck its nose in and interfered with the free market by supporting ethanol, consumers would’ve been better off.

The good news is, the day of reckoning could be upon us.

I’ve heard rumors recently that the ethanol mandate is in serious trouble. And an abrupt removal

From: http://www.westernjournalism.com/a-day-of-reckoning-for-our-political-leaders/

Pfizer Rises to the Occasion and Changes Big Pharma Forever

By Alex Planes, The Motley Fool

Filed under:

On this day in economic and financial history…

Pfizer‘s Viagra (sildenafil citrate), the little blue pill with the big marketing campaign, was first cleared for sale by the FDA on March 27, 1998, becoming the first drug cleared to treat erectile dysfunction in the United States. Originally developed in 1989 at a Pfizer research facility in historic Sandwich, England to treat hypertension and angina pectoris, the drug soon became man’s second-favorite invention to come out of the town of Sandwich when early clinical trials found that it was a lot better at creating erections than curing angina.

Pfizer took the opportunity to penetrate a virtually untapped market. Sildenafil gained a patent in 1996 as it moved through the latter stages of its erectile-dysfunction clinical trials. The drug became a raging success right out of the gate, thrust into the spotlight by one of the first major publicity campaigns ever mounted for a prescription drug. With public figures such as Bob Dole (fresh off his failed 1996 presidential candidacy — you know that if Bill Clinton had lost, he would have been the political pitchman instead) and sports stars like Pele and Rafael Palmeiro promoting it, Viagra became one of Pfizer’s biggest and most durable successes.

In its first year alone, Viagra brought Pfizer a billion dollars in sales. The drug’s smashing success caused several well-endowed competitors to spring up, including Bayer and GlaxoSmithKline‘s Levitra and Eli Lilly’s Cialis. A decade after its introduction, Viagra was producing monster results for Pfizer, accounting for $1.9 billion in annual sales in 2009. Shortly afterward, the global market for erectile dysfunction surpassed $5 billion in cumulative revenue. It was six years after Viagra’s FDA approval that the Dow Jones Industrial Average added Pfizer to its ranks, an acknowledgment of the drugmaker’s impressive quadrupling of revenue over that short time frame.

Viagra couldn’t maintain its position as the market leader forever: Cialis passed the ED pioneer about 12 years after its FDA approval. However, its influence on the drug industry has been more important than its impact on Pfizer’s bottom line. Sales and marketing have become a much larger part of pharmaceutical companies’ strategies, and roughly 30% of the industry’s expenses are sales- and marketing-related. In some cases, drugmakers spend more on marketing than on research and development! Viagra isn’t set to lose its patent protection until 2019, but with 20 million American men already familiar with it, the drug is likely to remain a blockbuster for years to come.

Polyethylene Pam
Viagra wasn’t the only British chemical with a major March 27 milestone. Research chemists Reginald Gibson and Eric Fawcett, working at Imperial Chemical Industries, accidentally discovered the plastic polyethylene on March 27, 1933. Faulty equipment had introduced unwanted oxygen to a reaction of ethylene and benzaldehyde, creating a lump of plastic substance that held promising opportunities. Within three years, polyethylene …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance

Phyllis Schlafly CPAC: Mitt Romney, John McCain A ‘Bunch Of Losers’

By The Huffington Post News Editors

Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly bashed on Saturday former — and failed — Republican presidential nominees Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney, calling them establishment candidates who moved to the center based on advice from consultants rather than embracing conservative values.

“We’ve had the establishment pick another loser for us,” she said of Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee, at CPAC. “The fight we have, and the fight I want you to engage in, is the establishment against the grassroots. The establishment has given us a whole series of losers. Bob Dole and John McCain. Mitt Romney.”

“Why is it that the establishment has given us this bunch of losers?” she added later.

Read More…
More on CPAC

…read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at Huffington Post

Should We Get Rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

By John Grgurich

Freddie Mac

Filed under: , , , ,

Andrew Harrer, Bloomberg via Getty Images

What if the two government-owned housing agencies that backstop so many of the nation’s mortgages ceased to exist? A new report from an influential think tank says that’s what should happen.

But while the plan isn’t quite as radical as it first sounds, if implemented it would mean a significant change if another housing bubble builds and bursts — a change that would have more of the risk falling onto individual homeowners instead of the federal government.

Housing America’s Future: New Directions for National Policy” was authored by the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington, D.C.-based group founded by former Senate luminaries Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole, and George Mitchell.

Among other things, the report recommends slowly winding down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — the government-owned housing agencies that had to be bailed out at great taxpayer expense after the most recent real-estate bust — and replacing them with what the report’s authors call the “Public Guarantor.”

Taking the heat off taxpayers and putting it on homeowners

As the name suggests, the Public Guarantor would serve a similar function as Fannie and Freddie, but with a twist that would take the heat off the taxpayer in the event of another catastrophic housing-market event, like the one we saw in 2007.

Right now, Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages originated by the nation’s banks, package them up into mortgage-backed securities, and sell them to investors. In return, Fannie and Freddie pay interest on the securities back to the investors.

But unlike Fannie and Freddie, the Public Guarantor wouldn’t buy mortgages or issue mortgage-backed securities. The private sector would now handle that. And in the event of another burst housing bubble, the Public Guarantor would only guarantee investors their interest payments and the return of their initial investments.

This guarantee would only be triggered after the private capital in line ahead of it had been exhausted. Specifically, the government would be fourth in line to take a loss, which means, of course, the taxpayer is also fourth in line.

Mission accomplished, right? Yes, but it’s a double-edged sword.

Goliath Wins This Match, for David’s Own Good

While it’s great that the taxpayer is less on the hook for mortgage-market trouble, that default risk has to land somewhere.

Sponsored Linksadsonar_placementId=1505951;adsonar_pid=1990767;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=242;adsonar_zh=252;adsonar_jv=’ads.tw.adsonar.com’;

With this new plan, part of that somewhere is back onto the borrower, who would be first in line to take the hit if the Public Guarantor guarantee is ever triggered. Next in line after borrowers are private-credit enhancers and finally the corporate resources of mortgage issuers and servicers.

So in the end, under this proposed plan the government would only be giving an ironclad guarantee to investors in privately issued mortgage-backed securities.

Why favor the big investor over the little homeowner? …read more
Source: FULL ARTICLE at DailyFinance