By Pompeo Communications

WASHINGTON, D.C. - In response to today’s Subcommittee on Energy and Power hearing, Congressman Pompeo released the following statement opposing H.R. 1380, the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act, or NAT GAS Act.

“The NAT GAS Act is the latest example of a systemic problem in Congress whereby we pick winners and losers in the energy markets, which does nothing to drive down the price at the pump for the American consumer.  Legislation that increases, extends and creates new subsidies for one specific fuel source - spending more taxpayer money - is wrong for Kansas, wrong for consumers, and wrong for the future of our country.

Just over 4 months ago I was the President of a business which sold equipment to independent oil and gas producers.  I know this industry firsthand.  Natural gas, ethanol and other fuels all have shown great promise, and those industries should be able to demonstrate their products’ value on the open market without government interference.  I have been working hard to break down the regulatory barriers that prevent those industries from providing affordable energy for America.

Tackling our nation’s debt, removing regulatory barriers, and creating opportunities to innovate are why I came to Congress.  Burdening our nation with another billion-dollar subsidy program for a specific, successful industry is simply the wrong approach.  I will continue to support legislation to lower regulations and increase access for energy companies in order to address the high cost of energy, which impacts many Kansans and Kansas businesses.  However, I am opposed to all legislation like H.R. 1380, which amounts to nothing more than increased government interference favoring one industry over another.  That is simply not the role of the federal government.”

Click here to hear Congressman Pompeo’s statement during the subcommittee hearing.

By Kate Kaye, ClickZ

Senator Scott Brown’s 2010 election campaign won accolades for harnessing supporter momentum using digital tools. Now, the Republican from Massachusetts is latching onto an opposition group’s anti-Brown message, in part to help fuel his 2012 reelection campaign.

At issue is a television spot paid for by the League of Women Voters which states that Brown voted to eliminate clean air standards that reduce smokestack and tailpipe emissions. The ad features a young girl breathing through an oxygen mask. The LWV campaign launched on April 29.

Now, Brown is hoping to counteract the negative publicity while inspiring his supporters to open their pocketbooks through his “Defend Our Senator” effort.

“Even though my election is not for another year-and-a-half, the political machine is already gearing up against me. In the months to come, the special interest groups will run many more negative and personal attack ads, just like they did during my special election last year,” notes a page on the ScottBrown.com site.

The page features a long missive from Brown, defending his vote for a Senate bill amendment that would have temporarily suspended carbon dioxide or methane related Environmental Protection Agency actions under the Clean Air Act. The amendment didn’t pass. An op-ed by Brown published in the Boston Herald today featured a similar message to the one posted on his site.

Below the letter from Brown and an online fundraising form are social sharing buttons imploring supporters to “Defend with Friends” through Facebook and “Defend with Tweets” on Twitter. Beneath that sits a YouTube video suggesting that “liberal special interests are distorting” Brown’s record.

“Let’s send a message to the mudslingers that their negative attacks won’t work,” states the video’s announcer, as the word “Donate” appears on the screen.

Earlier today, on his Facebook page, Brown thanked “everyone that is spreading on Facebook our latest response video defending my pro jobs vote against more regulations.”

According to an LWV press release, in addition to spending seven-figures on the TV ads, the group is also running a “six-figure” online campaign to “target high traffic in-state websites and social media outlets.” In addition to the ads targeting Brown, the organization is running similar ads opposing Missouri Republican Senator Claire McCaskill for her vote for the EPA amendment.

The Brown effort appears to be aimed at generating donations towards his 2012 reelection campaign from his supporter base, and possibly spurring interest from voters who are offended by the LWV ad. In addition, Brown aims to counteract negative sentiment and hopes for people to back him in their own words on Facebook and Twitter.

To fight rumors during the 2008 election alleging that Barack Obama is a Muslim, his camp promoted a section on his site using search ads. About a month before the election, a search on “Obama Muslim” turned up a sponsored link that read, “Barack Obama is a Christian. Get the facts at his official site.”

Yet, not all campaigns see the value in refuting attacks, especially if they’re worried about increasing awareness of the negative allegations. For instance, around the same time that the Obama campaign was running ads affirming the President’s religion, John McCain’s campaign chose not to use web ads to fight a smear from Obama for America, which linked McCain to the Savings and Loan crisis.

--------

Also another despicable, desperate effort AIMED AT CHILDREN ”IMATTERMARCH‘ was reported by Tom Nelson who extracts this comment from the militant enviro-website:

PALEEZE....we breathe out air with 40,000 ppm CO2. In most workplaces, auditoriums, meeting halls and classrooms, CO2 reaches levels of 1000-2000ppm. In submarines it rises to 6,000-11,000ppm with no ill effects.  Nurseries pump in CO2 at 1000ppm of higher into greenhouses because plants love it. CO2 is NOT POLLUTION. Please make your voices heard against the League of Women Voters and this children’s web site to stop the lies.  Contact: League of Women Voters: Kelly Ceballos, 202-263-1331 at kceballos@lwv.org

By Rob Gillies

Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper won his coveted majority government in elections that changed Canada’s political landscape with the opposition Liberals and Quebec separatists suffering a shattering defeat.

Harper, who took office in 2006, has won two elections but until Monday’s vote had never held a majority of Parliament’s 308 seats, forcing him to rely on the opposition to pass legislation.

While Harper’s hold on Parliament has been tenuous during his five-year tenure, he has managed to nudge an instinctively center-left country to the right. He has gradually lowered sales and corporate taxes, avoided climate change legislation, promoted Arctic sovereignty, upped military spending and extended Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan.

Elections Canada reported preliminary results on its website, giving the Conservatives 167 seats, which will give Harper four years of uninterrupted government.

“We are grateful, deeply honored, in fact humbled by the decisive endorsement of so many Canadians,” Harper told elated supporters at the Telus Convention Centre in Calgary, Alberta.

The leftist New Democratic Party was projected to become the main opposition party for the first time in Canadian history with 102 seats, tripling their support in a stunning setback for the Liberals who have always been either in power or leading the opposition.

“It’s an historic night for New Democrats,” NDP leader Jack Layton told a delirious crowd in downtown Toronto.

Harper was helped by the NDP surge, which split the left-of-center vote in many districts, handing victory to Conservative candidates, especially in Ontario, where the Liberals were decimated in their last national stronghold.

Former colleagues of Harper say his long-term goals are to shatter the image of the Liberals - the party of former Prime Ministers Jean Chretien, Lester Pearson and Pierre Trudeau - as the natural party of government in Canada, and to redefine what it means to be Canadian.

Harper, who comes from the conservative western province of Alberta, took a major step toward that goal on Monday night as the Liberals suffered their worst defeat in Canadian history - dropping to 34 seats from 77, according to the preliminary results.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff congratulated Harper and New Democrat leader Jack Layton and accepted responsibility for the “historic defeat.”

“Democracy teaches hard lessons, and we have to learn them all,” Ignatieff told a somber gathering in Toronto.

Ignatieff, who even lost his own seat in a Toronto suburb, said, “I will play any part that the party wishes me to play as we go forward to rebuild.”

Stephen Clarkson, a professor of political science at the University of Toronto, said the 52-year-old Harper should now be considered a transformative figure in Canadian history.

“It’s a sea change,” Clarkson said.

Harper counted on the economy to help hand him the majority. Canada has outperformed other major industrialized democracies through the financial crisis, recovering almost all the jobs lost during the recession while its banking sector remains intact. He said he would continue his plan to create jobs and growth without raising taxes.

He campaigned on a message that the New Democrats stood for higher taxes, higher spending, higher prices and protectionism. He called the election a choice between “a Conservative majority” and “a ramshackle coalition led by the NDP that will not last but will do a lot of destruction.”

Gerry Nicholls, who worked under Harper at a conservative think tank, has said that having the New Democrats’ as the main opposition party would be ideal for Harper because it would define Canadian politics in clearer terms of left vs. right.

The Conservatives have built support in rural areas and with the “Tim Horton’s crowd” - a reference to a chain of doughnut shops popular with working class Canadians. They also have blitzed the country with TV attack ads, running them even during telecasts of the Academy Awards and the Super Bowl.

Harper has deliberately avoided sweeping policy changes that could derail his government, but now has an opportunity to pass any legislation he wants with his new majority. H/T Dr. Gordon Fulks