I was flipping through CNN’s website and came across the “Solving the energy crisis: You decide” link, so I decided to see what people were saying.  Now this is a non-scientific on-line poll, so I wouldn’t read too much into it.  However, with over 26,000 people responding, I think it should be close to the public view.  So, let’s see what the people are saying and how it is matching up with the two main candidates positions.

Question 1 - Expanding domestic drilling is:
a good idea (58%)
a bad idea (42%)
Advantage McCain

Question 2 - Limiting Wall Street money flowing into oil markets is:
 a good idea (50%)
 a bad idea (50%)
Tie

Question 3 - A windfall profits tax on Big Oil:
 a good idea (41%)
 a bad idea (59%)
Advantage McCain

Question 4 - Enacting a ‘cap and trade’ plan
 a good idea (63%)
 a bad idea (37%)
Advantage Obama

Question 5 - Creating an Apollo project for renewable energy
 a good idea (86%)
 a bad idea (14%)
Advantage Obama

Question 6 - Getting serious about conservation
 a good idea (91%)
 a bad idea (9%)
Advantage Obama

Question 7 - Using more biofuels
 a good idea (44%)
 a bad idea (56%)
Advantage McCain

Question 8 - Tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
 a good idea (15%)
 a bad idea (85%)
Advantage McCain

Question 9 - Suspending the gas tax
 a good idea (15%)
 a bad idea (85%)
Advantage Obama

Question 10 - Lifting the ethanol tariff
 a good idea (76%)
 a bad idea (24%)
Advantage McCain

Question 11 - Requiring utilities to buy renewable power
 a good idea (79%)
 a bad idea (21%)
Advantage Obama

Question 12 - Easing refining restrictions
 a good idea (55%)
 a bad idea (45%)
Advantage McCain

Question 13 - Building more nuclear plants
 a good idea (79%)
 a bad idea (21%)
Advantage McCain

With 13 questions, McCain leads 7 to 5 (with 1 tie).  This shows where the two candidates need to focus on their strengths within this issue if they are going to win the election.  The economy and energy are intertwined to be the single most important issue this election year.

Interestingly enough, Nancy Pelosi is making some strange comments regarding energy which seems to be out of touch with the public:

Today, the New Direction Congress will vote on legislation to bring down gas prices by taking crucial steps to curb excessive speculation in the energy futures market. The President himself could lower prices by drawing down a small portion of our government oil stockpile, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The New Direction Congress will continue to bring forth responsible proposals to increase supply, reduce prices, protect consumers, and transition America to a clean, renewable energy independent future.

Well, Pelosi, the people do not want you to play around with Wall Street or tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.  She seems to have forgotten that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is designed for emergencies (such as an interruption to the oil supply) and that the oil used has to be replaced, meaning gas prices will go up after dropping a few pennies.  Additionally, “responsible proposals to increase supply?”  How?  When?

The President … wants to say, ‘but for drilling in protected areas offshore, our economy would be thriving and the price of gas would be lower.’ That hoax is unworthy of the serious debate we must have to relieve the pain of consumers at the pump and to promote energy independence.

Creating jobs, cutting our international trade deficit, and increasing corporate tax revenue through sales isn’t a hoax.  It’s “unworthy of the serious debate” because enough Democrats are siding with the Republicans and the general public calling for increased drilling, and that would put a victory on a major issue in the pocket of McCain, and could help him win the election in November.  We’re not stupid, Pelosi.

Related articles:
Market Watch - “Pelosi: Bush Drilling Proposal a Hoax Unworthy of Serious Debate on Gas Prices”
CNN Money - “Solving the energy crisis: You decide”
The BoBo Files - “No Good News Coming out of DC Today!”

I’m sure every news channel you’ve turned to today has discussed the projected “record deficit” in 2009. There is no kidding that a $482 Billion deficit is big news, but we do need to remember that these are projections. The past few years have shown that the projections tend to be much larger than the actual figures when the books are consolidated, however, that doesn’t mean we need to look at this carefully.

What is driving the deficit projections? For starters, the cooling economy. A slow or contracting economy tends to result in lower tax revenues. If people fear the possibility of losing their job, they will spend less. Companies facing customers who spend less are less likely to hire new employees, provide raises, or increase production. All this leads to less money coming into the government. Secondly, the low value of the dollar leads to inflation in prices, especially with gas costing around $4/gallon. This directly impacts everyone, both individuals and companies. Third, and the most important, is Social Security obligations.

Projected Social Security obligations for 2009 is $227 Billion. This is how much the government owes the program which, once again, Congress has failed to deal with. It doesn’t matter if it is a Republican or Democratic Congress. Neither party wants to deal with the issue since they fear a voter blowback in the next election year.

Well, I’m sorry to disappoint you Congress, but IT IS YOUR JOB! You are hired to serve the interest of the nation, not your party. The Republicans did a decent job of at least looking like they were trying to solve the problem, but neither has really stepped up to the plate and do what they were hired to do. And, if Congress is lacking a practical solution to this issue, feel free to read my proposal for 18 months ago. It might not win you votes next year … but then again, it just might. People are looking for Congress to act, not sit in DC and talk to reporters.

Ok, enough preaching. So what else can Congress do for next year? For starters, they need to cool the spending on new projects and focus on important issues. The first thing to focus on is the Housing and Financial markets. Congress has finally addressed what I proposed in regards to housing by passing legislation to help people facing unfavorable mortgages (primarily, the interest-only and ARM mortgages) to help people retain their homes and pay their bills. This will help stabilize housing prices and related industries (construction, realtors, etc).

The second area, being Financials, is a little harder to handle. The economy is not only a financial field but also an emotional one. If investors and bank customers fear that they might lose their money, they are less likely to hand it over to someone else. You hear people complain about the government is bailing out the big banks but not the little guys. There is a reason for this. If an individual goes bankrupt, it only impacts one or two families. If a big bank fails, it impacts all the customers of the bank. This isn’t just the individual investors, but also businesses and foreign investors. This creates a large ripple that impacts so many others industries that it could create a domino effect that sinks the nation resulting in a depression.

So what should you do if/when the government fails to act? Be smart with your money and live within your means. That means, just because you can afford a new $40,000 car, it doesn’t mean you need to buy it. The $23,000 used car of the same model year is just as good, and it saves you from having to spend $17,000 (plus interest). The same goes with homes, electronics, and anything else.

See, you have to live within your financial constraints, so it boggles the mind why the government cannot do the same. So why don’t you lead by example and make Congress take notice. If your elected officials cannot be financially responsible, replace them with someone who will. After a few elections, the politicians will take notice, and maybe … just maybe, you won’t have to worry about “the next” record deficit projection.

Related articles:
Financial Times - “Record deficit of $482bn forecast for 2009″

I found this quite interesting, especially since it is so unique in the “modern era.”  An Army Private, that has been on death row for 20 years, will not have much longer to wait.  The President has authorized his execution.  While the article doesn’t say when the execution will be, I would assume that it will occur before the years end.  I doubt this will be an election issue, but it might.

The following comes from the Politico.  I recommend you visit their site so they receive credit for providing the article and to read the parts that I’ve left out.

Statement from the White House:

President Bush this morning accepted the recommendation of the Secretary of the Army to approve a sentence of death for Army Private Ronald A. Gray, affirming the sentence that resulted from a general court martial for multiple charges of murder and rape committed while serving as a member of the Armed Services. While approving a sentence of death for a member of our Armed Services is a serious and difficult decision for a Commander-in-Chief, the President believes the facts of this case leave no doubt that the sentence is just and warranted. Private Gray was convicted of committing brutal crimes, including two murders, an attempted murder, and three rapes. The victims included a civilian and two members of the Army. Because additional legal challenges are expected in this case, we will decline to comment further. The President’s thoughts and prayers are with the victims of these heinous crimes and their families and all others affected.

100 days to go until election day.  Are you ready?  What are your views on the campaigns so far?

Now that we’ve looked at the Democrats, it’s time to turn our attention to the Republicans.

Mitt Romney - Often touted as being on the “short list,” Romney is well known on the national scene following the three-way race between himself, McCain, and Mike Huckabee during the Republican Primary.  Being a Republican from a Democratic state, and the son of a popular Governor of Michigan, Romney’s resume would fit with McCain’s persona of working with the left and being popular in non-traditional Republican states.  The drawback would be the vast amount of video tape from the primaries with the two candidates bickering back and forth.

Mike Huckabee - In my view, Huckabee is the oral-equivellent to Obama.  His personnality and experience as a Minister makes him very engaging with the public and speaks from the heart.  Coming in second in the delegate count during the primaries, he would go a long way with pulling in the base and evangelical movements into the McCain camp; a segment that McCain is struggling with.  The problem with him is some of his historical comments on the role of women in the household and the bad joke at the NRA meeting claiming that the noise in the background was Obama trying to hide since someone pointed a gun at him. 

Tim Pawlenty - Also being a Republican Governor in a Democratic state, he won re-election in a tough election year for the Republican party.  This shows some cross-party apeal that might help bolster McCain on the national level.  His youth and comfort in front of a crowd will also help improve the impression of the McCain campaign.  While he probably won’t swing Minnesota to McCain, he could cause the Obama campaign to spend more time and resources in that state which could have been used in other close states.  His biggest drawback is the lack of national name recognition that Huckabee and Romney have.

Joe Lieberman - The Maverick ticket.  While being 99% Democrat on all his votes in the Senate, his support for the Iraq war won him the rejection of party Democrats in Connecticut during the primaries for re-election.  However, with support of Independents and Republicans in the state (as well as loyal Democratic supporters), he won re-election as an Independent.  This put a larger thorn in the side of core Democrats, making him a darling for the Republican party.  Sharing McCain’s stance on the war has led him to become McCain’s shadow on many trips to the Middle East.  However, having him on the ticket risks alienating enough Republican voters that might cost McCain the election.

Bobby Jindal - The Republican Obama.  Jindal would instantly quell some of the irrational attention given to Obama based solely on race and the historical aspect thereof.  He has some other positives in his life, including being a Rhode Scholar (to help with the educated population), a convert from Hinduism to Catholisism (to help with the evangelicals), and a professional consultant (to help with the economic conservatives).  He also assisted in turning around the failing Louisiana healthcare system when he was Secretery of Health and Hospitals (before becoming Governor).  His primary drawback is his age, strange as that may sound.  He is younger than Obama; a point that McCain surrogates tend to use against his challenger.

Charlie Crist - If there was any way to avoid a repeat of the 2000 election, Crist is that option.  Being a popular Governor of Florida (taking over for another popular Republican Governor), Crist’s endorsement of McCain during the primaries played a major role in dicating the outcome.  Rudy Giuliani was favored to win the state, but Crist’s endorsement swayed enough of the electorate behind McCain. 

Tom Ridge - The Security Ticket.  If McCain wants to solidify his campaign around national security, Ridge would be the ideal pick.  He was tapped to be the first Secretery of Homeland Security following 9/11.  Also being a popular ex-Governor of Pennsylvania would put the swing state (and all the electoral votes) in play, and with a close election, it would be enough to tap the scales especially if McCain carries Florida.  The drawback is his stance on abortion, making McCain’s rocky relationship with the evangelicals even more shaky.

Lindsey Graham - Second to Lieberman, Graham would create a moderate ticket when linked with McCain.  While still caucussing with the Republicans, Graham has often taken liberal stances on some more conservative issues.  This could risk suppressing the Republican turnout during the election.  However, he has a good reputation of working within the Senate to get things done, and that might help the ticket when combined with McCain’s willingness to work with others.

Rob Portman - Portman is an accomplished Ohio Congressman and director of the Office of Budget Management, making him an ideal choice to help secure the battleground state as well as aid in the economic knowledge gap currently facing the McCain ticket.  Unfortunately, he served during the Bush administration, making him an easy target for the Obama camp to use the anti-Bush movement within the Democrat base and with some Independents.

John Thune - Though popular within Republican circles, his lack of national recognition could potentially hurt the ticket.  His age and popularity helps to balance out some of the influence Obama has over the general public, but the amount of resources it would take to introduce the Senator from South Dakota might put unnecessary strain on the McCain campaign.

Of the ten above, I think the best picks for McCain would be Pawlenty and Romney.  Both are popular figures and will fill in holes in the McCain campaign.  Jindal would also be an interesting choice, but there could be a backlash of McCain “just trying to put a minority on the ticket.”

I hope these two articles give you some information on the 20 most-likely VP choices facing the Obama and McCain campaigns.  Stay tuned to stay informed.

Related articles:
The Law of Politics - “Cheaper Oil and Gas prices when McCain picks VP”
Carnival of Politics - “McCain and Romney, now that’s the ticket by Marie Jon”