My review of Frank Miniter's new book "The Future of the Gun" is available here.
Thursday, September 4, 2014
This year there are about 2.4 million adults living in Orange County, California. Despite the "surge," there are few permit holders, representing just 0.07 percent of the adult population. Even if all those applying for permits had their requests granted, that would still mean just about one-tenth of one percent have a permit. The LA Times notes:
According to the analysis, permits are spread throughout the county, but certain cities — including Huntington Beach, Newport Beach and Yorba Linda — have a higher concentration of licensees. Others, including Santa Ana and Garden Grove, have had much fewer approved permits. . . .Not to surprisingly, giving the training costs to get a permit, it is the well-to-do areas of the county that are getting the permits.
Not only is there a large tax credit per car, but the federal government subsidizes massively subsidizes electric cars via its MPG regulations (here and here). From the LA Times:
Electric car sales are not charging the marketplace. A new study by online automotive research company Edmunds.com suggests the segment may have run out of gas.
Sales of electric drive vehicles are stuck at about 3.6% of all new car sales for 2014, Edmunds senior analyst Jessica Caldwell said.
That's below the 3.7% market share for 2013, and it's not likely to grow any before the end of the year.
And that's during an otherwise robust sales season. Total figures for August were higher than any time in the last decade.
Automakers sold about 1.6 million vehicles in the U.S. in August, an increase of about 3% from August 2013, according to initial industry estimates released Wednesday.
"The whole automobile market has grown," Caldwell said. "We’re not seeing electric vehicles as part of that growth." . . .
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
This appears to be yet another example where the Obama administration did something outrageously bad and there were no consequences. Senators are angry that Brennan first denied that the spying was occurring and then refused to acknowledge any real wrongdoing. If Obama really believed that Brennan didn't understand or appreciate the seriousness of the spying, isn't it likely that he would have removed Brennan? If Obama really believed that such spying was wrong, wouldn't removing Brennan have been a good signal of that disagreement? If only to placate angry senators who view the executive branch spying on their overseers in congress as an outrage, you should think that Obama would remove Brennan. From The Hill newspaper:
. . . "The CIA's spying on its overseers in Congress and Brennan's failure to acknowledge any serious wrongdoing by the agency demonstrate a tremendous failure of leadership,” he added.
“There are still significant unanswered questions about the search of the Senate Intelligence Committee's computers — and Director Brennan and CIA leadership must be accountable to Congress on this matter," said Udall.
The CIA’s inspector general caused a shockwave on Capitol Hill a month ago, when it concluded that five agency officials had “improperly accessed” Senate Intelligence Committee computers to review staffers’ files and emails.
The snooping was conducted through a network to share files for the Senate committee’s report on the CIA’s history of “enhanced interrogation” techniques, such as waterboarding.
The admission set off a whirlwind of criticism for the agency and validated charges from committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who accused the CIA of unconstitutionally violating the separation of powers during a March floor speech.
It was especially bad news for Brennan, who had flatly denied Feinstein’s allegation as groundless and “beyond the scope of reason in terms of what we’d do.” . . .
Monday, September 1, 2014
Socialized medical system in the UK can't give a young boy suffering a brain tumor the specialized medical treatment he needs. So the family, trying to save the boy's life, takes the boy out of the country. In response, the government puts out a criminal warrant for the family. From the Associated Press:
The grandmother of a 5-year-old British boy with a severe brain tumor accused U.K. authorities on Monday of cruelty for seeking an arrest warrant and pursuing the family abroad after his parents removed him from a British hospital against medical advice.
Hours later, a Spanish judge ordered the parents' detention for 72 hours while a court in Madrid considers whether to grant Britain an extradition request.
Grandmother Patricia King told the BBC it was an "absolute disgrace" that her son and daughter-in-law were accused of child neglect after they took Ashya from Southampton General Hospital last week. The family says U.K. authorities had refused to give Ashya the kind of treatment he needed.
The family has criticized Britain's health care system, saying he needs an advanced treatment option called proton beam therapy and that it wasn't being made available to him.
King's parents were arrested Sunday in southeastern Spain after a European arrest warrant was issued by Interpol at the request of British police. Their son is receiving medical treatment for a brain tumor. After his parents' arrest, he was admitted to a Spanish hospital. . . .
Sunday, August 31, 2014
From Politico:
UPDATE: The WSJ has this discussion on court packing.
The Senate barely does anything these days — except approve judges that could shape the law for a generation.
Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) changed Senate rules in November to ease the approval of most of President Barack Obama’s nominees, Democrats have churned through confirmations of dozens of new judges — giving them lifetime appointments that will extend the administration’s influence for years to come. Over a roughly equivalent period during the 113th Congress, the Senate confirmed 36 district and circuit court judges before the rules change and 68 after, according to Senate statistics.
Republicans have fought Democrats at every step, using their remaining procedural tools to stymie quick approval of judges and many executive branch nominees whose sway over regulations are magnified by today’s congressional stalemate. But the days of epic confirmation fights are over now because all nominees — save for those to the Supreme Court — need only a bare majority for approval after Democrats used the unilateral “nuclear option” to change the rules. . . .Of course, the comparison of 36 to 68 is quite misleading as it takes a while at the beginning of every Congress to get the judicial nomination process up to speed.
UPDATE: The WSJ has this discussion on court packing.
Saturday, August 30, 2014
From Politico:
Obama hinted during a press conference Thursday that he may not act by the end of summer, a deadline he set in June when he turned from a legislative strategy to an administrative one. At the White House briefing Friday, press secretary Josh Earnest also declined to say that Obama would make a move soon. . . .The deadline was a political one and he broke it for political reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
