A Step in the Right Direction

But it’s a small step, and much more needs to be done. A bill has moved through the Texas legislature—it’s now on Governor Greg Abbott’s (R) desk—that would create a $200 annual registration fee for battery vehicles.

State Senator Robert Nichols (R), who sponsored the bill in the Senate:

As more of these vehicles drive on Texas roads, there are concerns about how they contribute to the funding of the roads which they use. Currently, Texas uses the gasoline/diesel fuel tax to fund transportation projects; however, with the growing use of EVs, the revenue from the fuel tax is decreasing, which diminishes our ability to fund road improvements for all drivers.

That’s a necessary step in maintaining funding for Texas’ roads and bridges, but it’s insufficient because wear and tear of our roads and bridges isn’t the only cost imposed on us by battery vehicles.

Battery vehicle owners also should be the only ones to pay for the environmental damage their vehicles inflict on Texas’ land. Battery vehicle batteries, at their end of life, cannot be recycled; they can only be “disposed of.” Major components of those batteries, like lithium, cobalt, and nickel are enormously toxic, requiring the dead batteries to be carefully disposed of, lest that environmental damage get widespread.

Serious environmental damage also occurs at the beginning of the battery production cycle, even if much of that start damage doesn’t occur in Texas: mining lithium, cobalt, and nickel, along with copper, is even more environmentally damaging than battery disposal, from the destruction caused by the mining itself to the highly toxic mining waste byproducts—tailings—that are thrown off by the mining.

Much, if not most, of the lithium, cobalt, and nickel mining, along with a significant fraction of the increase in copper mining, is done for the sake of these batteries. The only ones who should be paying these environmental costs are the battery car owners. No one else.

Battery car owners are getting off light under this fee.

Self-Importance

President Joe Biden (D) avoids extemporaneous conversations and free-flowing question and answer sessions like the plague. This irritates the press.

A longtime Washington correspondent told Fox News Digital the expectation that Biden should stand before reporters and consistently answer questions was “pretty basic.”
“I think there’s a lot of frustration that there have been so incredibly few press conferences and so few opportunities generally to ask questions of the president,” they [sic] said. “It’s a fundamental thing. You know that the press corps has a job and it’s not just reporters trying to get questions asked for their own personal well-being…. You’re representing your viewers and your readers and your listeners.”
Added a White House correspondent: “There are serious concerns in the White House press corps about the way staff are hiding the president…. I would be surprised if Biden has another full solo press conference again in the remainder of his political career.”

How precious.

It’s certainly true that Biden speaks with the press as little as possible. However, we ordinary Americans don’t need the self-important press to act as our filter, or our DC watchdogs, or acting self-appointedly as our representatives—we elect our own representatives every couple of years—screening political doings and “reporting” what these august personages deem fit for our tender eyes and ears.

The real problem with Biden’s avoidance isn’t that he doesn’t interact freely with journalists, it’s that he won’t interact, freeform or otherwise, with his actual constituents, us American citizens. He won’t do townhalls with locals, he won’t do unscripted—and unscreened by his aides—interactions in diners, libraries, rec centers, not even ice cream parlors, places where us individual citizens could talk with him, ask him our questions and get his answers impromptu.

Biden avoids us like the plague, and that’s what matters.

The press’ anguished irritation over their limited time with Biden is singularly unimportant while being a strong measure of the journalists’ oblivious self-importance.

Lobbying

Even Senators do it on occasion. Senator Joe Manchin (D, WV), a few years ago (and only now appearing in some of the press) lobbied Alejandra Castillo, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Economic Development, to approve the Appalachian Climate Technology Now coalition’s application for as much as $100 million in Federal funds for

creat[ing] an industrial cluster around a number of climate resilience technologies while focusing on the development of resilient infrastructure and site readiness, attracting, training and retaining a skilled workforce, fostering entrepreneurship and startups, and building community capacity[.]

The coalition ultimately was awarded nearly $63 million in grants for the purpose.

ACT Now is a West Virginia-base entity. So far, so good; it’s entirely appropriate for Senators to front for their constituents.

ACT Now also is a coalition that includes, among others, the Charleston Area Alliance, which is chaired by Jack Rossi. Rossi also is listed as the Treasurer of the Joe Manchin for Senate campaign. Still so far, probably so good; Senators are allowed to lobby for constituents that are in some way connected to the Senator.

When Manchin wrote his lobbying letter to Castillo, he neglected to mention his connection to Rossi. Oops.

That far, no good. Manchin should have done the full disclosure bit and freely mentioned the Rossi-Manchin relationship, and he should have done so up front, in that letter and in any preceding and subsequent communication with Castillo and anyone else with whom he spoke on the matter.

We’ll Soon Learn Two Things

We’re about to learn two things about the Canadian government. The Public Service Alliance of Canada, which represents nearly a quarter million government employees, have gone on strike for…DEI claptrap like mandatory “unconscious bias” training; an intrinsically racist $1,500 bonus that’s only for Cree, Inuktitut, Dene, or any other Canada Indigenous language speakers; more racism in the form of special time off just for Indigenous employees; government-paid, which is to say Canadian taxpayer-paid, time off for union “training;” a union-administered “Social Justice Fund,” which PSAC carefully declines to say is its purpose—just give the union the money—and on and on.

One of the things we’re going to learn is how much courage Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and his government have in standing up to this union’s strike, an action (not unique to PSAC) that is, essentially, extortion in that a striking union is saying it’s not going to allow the struck entity to operate until the entity pays the union’s demanded vig. In particular, will the Trudeau government show the same “courage” against this employee strike that it showed against a recent trucker protest, and will it use similarly heavy-handed tactics, which included freezing/seizing bank accounts, to break up the union strike?

The other thing we’ll learn is how much, or how little, these workers are missed as Canada’s government continues to function without them.

The PSAC 224-page program of demands can be read here.

Punishing Success

You’ve earned your wages; husbanded them carefully; spent wisely, living within your means; paid your debts promptly and in full. As a result, you’ve gained an excellent credit rating.

Your reward? An artificially inflated mortgage cost, courtesy of the Progressive-Democratic Party-run Executive Branch, and redistribution of the fruits of your success, arbitrarily, to those who haven’t done those things.

A Biden administration rule is set to take effect that will force good-credit home buyers to pay more for their mortgages to subsidize loans to higher-risk borrowers.
Experts believe that borrowers with a credit score of about 680 would pay around $40 more per month on a $400,000 mortgage under rules from the Federal Housing Finance Agency that go into effect May 1, costs that will help subsidize people with lower credit ratings also looking for a mortgage, according to a Washington Times report Tuesday.

But. But, but, but. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Biden administration entity responsibility for this nonsense has long sought to give consumers more affordable housing options.

Under the new rules, consumers with lower credit ratings and less money for a down payment would qualify for better mortgage rates than they otherwise would have.

This is silly. The transfer of wealth from those who’ve earned good credit scores to those who have not will not make the latter better credit risks. It will increase the rate of default.

Here’s a thought: cut back on the regulations related to banking, lending, housing, landlording, construction, and utilities so as to bring down the cost of housing generally. See if that will give consumers more affordable housing options.

Stop punishing success; instead, encourage folks to work toward success.