CD-9 Travis Grantham Criticizes Obama on Rejection of Keystone XL Pipeline

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 19, 2012
CONTACT: Evan Kozlow

Tempe – Travis Grantham, candidate for Congress in Arizona’s new 9th Congressional District released the following statement today following President Obama’s decision to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline:

“It is inexcusable that President Obama has chosen partisan politics over the people of the United States by rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline project. President Obama and his entire administration have shown that special interests far outweigh the needs of the American people in regards to job creation, national security, and reducing our dependency on foreign oil.

The Keystone XL pipeline would have created approximately 20,000 new jobs for American workers throughout the country and into the Gulf of Mexico while bolstering our national security and our economy. I’ve witnessed firsthand the sacrifice that our troops are making on a daily basis defending our foreign sources of oil due to our lack of domestic production. With the rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline, President Obama has further solidified our dependence on foreign sources of oil and has dealt a major blow to the United States of America’s domestic energy production.

The United States is facing an unprecedented economic crisis in addition to an energy crisis that can no longer be ignored or pushed off to the next generation. President Obama has put his special interests well ahead of America’s on this day. The American people deserve far better leadership out of Washington than what is being exhibited now by both our Congress and our President.”

Travis Grantham is a candidate for Arizona’s Ninth Congressional District. He serves as the Chief Operations Officer at International Air Response based at the Phoenix Mesa Gateway Airport. He is also a Captain and Pilot in the Arizona Air National Guard’s 161st Air Refueling Wing based out of Sky Harbor International Airport. Travis and his wife Patricia have two daughters.

###

Explosive new evidence AZ judge ruling is illegal

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N  S E N S E , in Arizona

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Anthony Martin

Conservative Examiner

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part, “Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

“Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction.”

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state. This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue.

Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case. The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press, which can be accessed at the link above.

In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on the part of the federal government. This information was cited by United Patriots of America.

From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder, human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the Mexican border. This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.

The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense. This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal government with a vengeance. Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant, lawless federal government.

 

Join Our Mailing List

Eliminating state capital gains tax could spark an entrepreneurial surge

By Stephen Slivinski

An important driver of job growth is investment. Without investment, new businesses may not flourish or even see the light of day. And venture capital investment in technology start-ups is one of the highest-profile sources of new business births.

Tax policy can either obstruct the new capital that businesses need or it can step out of the way and allow thousands of flowers to bloom. A number of studies have shown that taxes on capital gains – the return an entrepreneur or investor receives on their investment – have been shown to be a barrier to entrepreneurship and the job growth it creates.

Capital flows where it can find high returns and low barriers to allocation, and businesses in states with lower capital gains taxes receive more investment than their higher-tax counterparts. A 1998 study by Harvard University professors Paul Gompers and Josh Lerner concluded that entrepreneurial activity is sensitive to the taxation of capital gains. In particular, the authors found that a reduction in capital gains taxes is associated with an increase in venture capital funding in a state.

A 2010 study by William Gentry of Williams College came to the same conclusion. His paper noted that “capital gains taxes could distort a number of important decisions of entrepreneurs. These decisions include starting a new business, expanding the business, and obtaining outside financing; the capital gains tax can also affect whether and when an entrepreneur sells his or her business.”

Arizona, like most states with an income tax, treats capital gains as “normal” income and taxes it at the same rate as all other income. But nine states, including New Mexico, tax investment at a lower rate than their standard income tax.

In the material released after the State of the State speech, Governor Brewer indicated she understands that Arizona needs to lower its tax barriers to capital investment – an important step. But the governor and legislature should go further and eliminate the tax on capital gains altogether.

Arizona can be the first state with an income tax to do that and could, as a consequence, end up being a hub for new venture capital activity.

Stephen Slivinski is a Senior Economist with the Goldwater Institute.

Learn more:

American Council for Capital Formation: Capital Gains Taxation and Entrepreneurship

Harvard University: What Drives Venture Capital Fundraising? (PDF)

American Action Forum: Employment Effects of Reducing Capital Gains Tax Rates in Ohio

Wendy Rogers: Arizona Needs & Supports the F-35

Wendy RogersBack in November, the East Valley Tribune and Ahwatukee Foothill News published an op-ed that I wrote in support of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. In that op-ed, I noted the critical importance the F-35 program plays to the national security of the United States. After meeting with Arizonians who are involved in the F-35’s development, I learned of their concern over program cuts and the unforeseen consequences that may result from debate over program reductions. For the sake of our national and economic security, these conversations need to stop.

The F-35 is America’s next fifth-generation, multi-role fighter that our military leaders have designated to replace our military’s current arsenal of ageing F-16 and F-18 fighters. The F-35 is a pragmatic approach to modernizing America’s air superiority by using the same platform to serve the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. The highly advanced capabilities of the F-35 will provide out troops in the air, sea and land with the technology and situational awareness to get the job done and safely return home.

A recent program update proves that 2011 was a banner year for the program. Of the 872 test flights and 6,622 test points the F-35 was to endure in 2011, the program surpassed those goals by flying 972 test flights and completing 7,823 test points. These flights and test points ensure that the plane is strong and reliable through hundreds of challenging scenarios. The results prove that the F-35 program is maturing faster than anticipated – which is a good problem to have when working with advanced military technology.

Despite these overachievements, we have seen a lot of change in America’s political landscape. Most significantly, the deficit reducing “supercommittee” failed, forcing $600 billion in mandatory cuts from Department of Defense programs. During negotiations leading up to the supercommittee, there was a groundswell of support for full program funding and members of the committee were prepared to defend the F-35 because they recognized it’s importance to America.

Unfortunately, because the committee failed, the program is once again under debate. As evidence, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta recently confirmed that he aims to cut Defense Department spending on next generation weapons programs which could include the F-35. While no one believes that the F-35 will be cancelled, small businesses right here in Arizona are watching closely to see if the Pentagon will uphold their commitment to program funding, since the small business community has capitalized their production lines in anticipation of program growth.

The bottom-line is that we cannot allow political expedience to dampen the progress of the F-35. The program is deeply connected to our economy and cuts would send ripple effects across a nation. The programs suppliers, consisting of 1,300 independent companies across the United States and supporting 127,000 jobs, have the most to lose. If those parts are no longer needed in the quantities that were originally requested, then those suppliers will be unable to meet payroll and the rising jobless claim rates in the United States will see a significant uptick.

The security of our nation and the protection of our troops are important to all of us. It is our job to ensure that the men and women in the armed services are armed with globally superior technology and protection. America’s ingenuity and industrial infrastructure can deliver that superiority, and we Americans can make sure that the program and our troops are fully supported. The F-35 is not just a budget line item. It is a line item that represents real people and business, and we need to let our elected officials in Washington know that we support the F-35.

Lt. Col. Wendy Rogers, USAF (retired) was one of the first 100 women pilots in today’s Air Force. In 2010, she ran and narrowly lost a bid for the Arizona State Senate in Democrat-leaning Legislative District 17. She owns and operates a Tempe-based office complex as well as a home inspection business with 10 fulltime employees operating in four counties. Lt Col Rogers and her retired Air Force husband have two adult ASU-grad children and live in Arizona’s brand new Congressional District 9.