Friday, January 21, 2011

Sen. Vitter Hopes to Retire Well on Earth Before It Turns Into Venus

In his Jan. 20, 2011 email update, Sen. David Vitter proudly proclaimed: "In 2009, I was the first member of Congress to challenge the radical environmentalists' attempt to regulate greenhouse gases by introducing a bill declaring that carbon dioxide, methane from agriculture and livestock, and water vapor are not air pollutants."

First of all, calling everyone who disagrees with you "radical" or "leftist" is not toning down political rhetoric. No need to overdo it, Senator. "Environmentalists" alone was enough for your supporters to open their pocketbooks.

Second of all, not wanting to breathe polluted air is not all that radical an agenda to espouse. Neither is the contention that too much of a good thing, even if it is a source of life, can be a bad thing. Just ask the gulf seafood you want us to eat, Senator. (Tip: you should pose your question
before you consume them.) According to Dr. Jeff Masters, guru of who did his dissertation on carbon dioxide (CO2): "increased CO2 from burning fossil fuels has already harmed sea life."

Dr. Masters further explains:
the fossil fuel industry's slogan, "Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution, we call it life!" could just as truthfully be phrased, "Carbon dioxide. We call it pollution, and we call it death." One need only look at our sister planet, Venus, to see that too much "life" can be a bad thing. There, an atmosphere of 96% carbon dioxide has created a hellish greenhouse effect. The temperatures of 860 F at the surface are hot enough to melt lead. There's not too much life there! [Is Carbon Dioxide a Pollutant?]

Maybe the Senator's objection to cap-and-trade regulation of CO2 comes from a good place, say, a healthy skepticism of science. I don't know, but I'm going to maintain my own healthy skepticism of his motives. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a.k.a., 70% of Senator Vitter's wealth comes from the Energy & Natural Resources sector of the economy. Too much carbon dioxide may be bad for your health, but too much regulation might be even worse for Sen. Vitter's checkbook.

Sunday, January 16, 2011

Jim Donelon Can Kiss My Ass on Canal Street!

State Farm will raise rates for mom-and-pop landlords, drop their wind and hail coverage

While the statewide average rate increase is 18 percent, actual increases in South Louisiana can be much higher.

In Orleans, Jefferson and protected parts of St. Bernard and Plaquemines, the average increase will be 59.2 percent, according to State Farm; in areas outside of levees in Plaquemines it will be 93.8 percent; and in areas outside of levees in St. Bernard, it will be 21.1 percent. In St. Charles Parish, the average increase will be 19.2 percent. In St. James and St. John the Baptist, it will be 22.6 percent... Other coastal parishes will also see increases.

State Farm spokeswoman Molly Quirk said that part of the rate increase calculation is the value of cutting the wind and hail policy. [Times-Picayune, 1-16-2011]

Can someone explain how you can charge more for less coverage? How did that get past the Louisiana insurance commission, and how much is Insurance Commissioner Donelon profiting from this? What is he getting that's worth throwing us under a bus?

The article talks about how State Farm has also raised rates on other policies, which were so numerous they probably ran out of room to list the auto insurance increases I also received from State Farm over the past year. I was wondering how my rates could increase on an 11-year-old vehicle on which I cut my coverage IN HALF because I couldn't even afford the insurance before the rate increase. It seems the answers to my questions are to be found in them new fangled calculators the State Farm home office sent to Baton Rouge.