Richard Schwab Writes

Here is my article, "Using less, producing more U.S. energy" which appeared in today's 4/11/12 Tri-County Press:

Using less, producing more U.S. energy

A lot of oil produced in the U.S. gets refined into gasoline in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. The gasoline then goes into pipelines for distribution.

The U.S. is now producing more gasoline than it needs.

So what's the problem?

The pipelines out of the Southern refineries are too few.

Robert Smith, an analyst at PFC Energy, said, "These pipelines are essentially filled to the brim and yet the East Coast market still doesn't have enough gasoline. So they're forced to import."

The U.S. is exporting a record amount of gasoline.

U.S. oil production is at an eight year high.

Any notion that production has been blocked or slowed doesn't square with the facts.

Oil is bought and sold in a world market. Instability in the Middle East causes oil futures to shoot up and higher prices at the gas pump. We have seen this movie before; it happens every single time.

Some politicians have disingenuously promised $2.50 gasoline - having us believe that if we just drilled more for oil, then gas prices would immediately drop.

The problem is America uses 20% of the world's oil. We have only 2% of the world's known oil reserves.

In addition, a drill for 2% and buy 20% strategy alone, ignores the fact that rapidly growing China and India are buying cars - that means the cost of gas will rise. In 2010, China alone added 10 million cars. That's just in one year.

We can't drill our way out of this problem.

President Obama stated, "We can't have an energy strategy from the last century that traps us in the past."

In the near term, the U.S. will continue to rely on responsible production of oil and gas. But over the long term, the Obama administration is committed to transitioning the U.S. from oil towards cleaner alternatives and energy efficiency.

The Obama administration's energy strategy for the future:

•Develop every source of American made energy.

•Develop as much oil and gas as possible - in a way that protects the health, safety, and natural resources of the American people. (U.S. natural gas production is at the highest level in more than 30 years. The Obama Administration's 2012-2017 Offshore Oil and Gas Development Program will make available more than 75% of our potential offshore oil and gas resources. And, we have joined with Mexico agreeing to make more than 1.5 million acres in Gulf exploration available - an estimated 172 million barrels of oil and 304 billion cubic feet of natural gas.)

•Develop Wind and Solar Power and Biofuels. (Clean energy use has doubled during the Obama administration.)

•Develop more energy efficient homes and buildings.

•Develop more energy efficient vehicles. (Fuel economy standards established by the Obama administration will have cars and trucks averaging 55 miles per gallon - reducing oil consumption by more than 2 million barrels a day.)

Instead of distorting facts, and presenting complete falsehoods for short term political gains, President Obama is offering America a real, sustainable energy future.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

In addition, here is a link to article on line:

http://communitypress.cincinnati.com/article/C2/20120404/VAV02/304040001/Using-less-producing-more-U-S-energy

Richard Schwab Writes

A rebirth for Athletes and America

My favorite two minutes

on Super Bowl Sunday was Chrysler's "It's Halftime in America" commercial. I will admit I tune into the NFL's Super Bowl as much, if not more, to see what advertisers roll out as how the two teams for the sport's top prize perform.

Eighty-one year old Academy Award-winning actor/director Clint Eastwood narrates the ad. "People are out of work and they're hurting. And they're all wondering what they're gonna do to make a comeback...The people of Detroit know a little something about this. They almost lost everything. But we all pulled together. Now the Motor City is fighting again." How inspirational. How patriotic. A soaring message of American resilience.

Political consultant Karl Rove and other Republicans heard a different message - a defense of President Obama's bail out of the U.S. auto makers.

Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney famously remarked that Detroit and its auto industry should have been allowed to go bankrupt. With the revival of Detroit's car makers, Romney seems almost disappointed.

In fact, by attacking "It's Halftime in America," Republicans risk looking like they want America to lose.

Karl Rove indicated he was "offended" by Eastwood's ad. Rove accused Chrysler of making the ad to pay off a debt it owed to the Obama administration for bailing out car makers. How cynical.

Chrysler denied such an intention. Chrysler's CEO denied the company had any intention of playing politics. An Obama spokesman said the administration had no role in the ad. Clint Eastwood (former Republican Mayor of Carmel, California and well known for being apolitical) released a statement denying any political motives. An Eastwood associate said, "He (Eastwood) hopes the discussion goes back to the original intent of the ad, which was to inspire people to take pride in their country."

America is staging a comeback, just like the U.S. auto industry. "It's Halftime in America" suggests the Detroit comeback will come true for the entire country. Eastwood tells us, "This country can't be knocked out with one punch. We get right back up again. And when we do, the world is going to hear the roar of our engines...Yeah, it's halftime, America. And our second half is about to begin."

Unlike many of my "Toyota Republican" acquaintances, I take great pride in owning a 2011 Chrysler Jeep Patriot.

Playing a part in Detroit's rebirth "makes my day."

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Protecting religion, women's health

Thanks to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (signed into law on March 23, 2010,) most health insurance plans (effective August 1, 2012) will cover women's preventive services without charging a co-pay or deductible. These preventive services include well women visits, domestic violence screening, and contraception. All were recommended to the Secretary of Health and Human Services by the independent Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Science.

Initially it was proposed, churches would be exempt from the rule. Though hospitals and universities with religious affiliations would have to comply.

Even though laws in 28 states currently have similar coverage requirements, the dogs of culture war were unleashed.

Political commentator Pat Buchanan barked, "In forcing the Catholic Church to violate its own principle, Obama has committed an act of federal aggression, crossing the line between church and state to appease his ACLU and feminist allies, while humiliating the Catholic bishops."

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) growled that the Obama policy was an "unambiguous attack on religious freedom."

Republican opponents of the President are playing the issue as evidence that Obama wants government to control all aspects of American life, even religious life.

Nothing could be further from the truth. This isn't about the separation of church and state. Health care is the issue. It is a woman's right to have access to health care, including the right to make decisions about reproduction. And, that means including contraception in prescription drug coverage.

When it comes to users of birth control, its nearly every woman in America. Polls show that the vast majority of Catholics use contraception.

U.S Senator John Kerry (D-MA) stated, "What I'm urging is a compromise that respects the substantive goal of making sure that women have access to care... while respecting matters of religious faith."

On 2/10/12 President Obama found the balance when he announced churches remain exempt and employers in church-allied organizations will not be required to offer free contraceptive coverage for workers. Insurance companies rather than religious-affiliated institutions will take the lead in enrolling employees for the birth control benefits and cover the cost.

Contraceptive coverage saves insurance companies money - covering contraception is cheaper than covering pregnancy and child birth.

Sister Carol Keethan, the President and CEO of the Catholic Health Association and Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood issued statements applauding President Obama's balanced policy.

"The Catholic Health Association is very pleased with the White House announcement that a resolution has been reached that protects the religious liberty and conscience rights of Catholic institutions," Keethan said.

Richards indicated, "In the face of a misleading and outrageous assault on women's health, the Obama administration has reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring all women will have access to birth control coverage."

In a nation of 300 million-plus people, there are always going to be big disagreements over issues like contraception and abortion. Contrary to the commonly held belief that such irreconcilable differences cannot be resolved, President Obama has shown us how.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Super PACs a corrupting influence on American politics

In this Presidential election cycle, we are experiencing, for the first time, the influence of Super PACs.

They can raise as much money as they want. They can spend as much money as they want

Super PACs exist because of Citizens United, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling against limits on spending by independent political action committees.

The Court said that as long as these committees were independent and didn't give money to candidates, they had no limit at all on what they could spend based on the principle of free speech.

Candidates are allowed to fund raise for these supposedly wholly independent committees. And, close aides, fundraisers, and relatives of the candidates run the Super PACs. The Court did not anticipate the extent to which PAC spending is closely tied to the candidates.

U.S. Senator John McCain blasted the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision which has given rise to the Super PACs and allows corporations to funnel as much money as they'd like into our elections. Senator McCain (who has been a long time advocate for campaign finance reform) said the court's ruling was, "one of the worst decisions I have ever seen." He went on to say, "I predict to you that there will be huge scandals associated with this huge flood of money."

Restore Our Future, a Super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Make Us Greater Again, a Super PAC supporting Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Winning Our Future, a Super Pac supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have already spent millions on predominantly negative attack adds and have had a significant impact on the Republican Presidential nomination process.

A Super PAC has been established to support President Barack Obama's re election.

In addition, there are dozens upon dozens of Super PACs that will be supporting or attacking congressional candidates.

This Presidential election year will be a corrosive year because of the toxic influence of Super PACs. People are going to be offended on all sides - conservatives, moderates, and liberals - to see how these PACs taint and change America's electoral process.

The Supreme Court was wrong in thinking you could have independent spending that was going to be totally independent of candidates. If it's wholly independent, it can't be corrupting. Problem is when someone gives $5 million to Winning Our Future, Newt Gingrich knows exactly who it is.

The Supreme Court's narrow decision, where they voted 5-4 to say corporations are people and money is speech, needs to be reversed or scaled back.

Money is not speech; money can stifle speech. Corporations are important, but they're not people.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Raucous, rabble-roused Republicans show a nasty streak

The long string of Republican debates have shown a Republican party exposed - not on the stage but in the audience.

Moderator Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul, "What do you tell a guy who is sick, goes into a coma and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays for his coverage? Are you saying society should just let him die?" The crowd yelled "Yeah!" and cheered.

"Your state has executed 234 death row inmates, more than any governor in modern times," NBC's Brian Williams told Rick Perry. The audience broke into cheers and applause.

Host Megyn Kelly played a YouTube video from Steven Hill, a gay soldier in Iraq. After Hill's video clip, in a shocking demonstration of disrespect for one of our American soldiers, audience members lustily booed him.

Herman Cain and Michelle Bachman both voiced their opinions in support of water boarding and torture. The Republican crowd cheered.

Newt Gingrich stood by his remarks where he said children from low-income households should be given the opportunity to be janitors in their own schools. Gingrich was asked by commentator Juan Williams, "Can't you see that this is viewed, at a minimum, as insulting to all Americans, but particularly to black Americans?" Gingrich responded, "No, I don't see that." The GOP audience whooped and cheered.

Boos at the suggestion that the federal government, not the states, should enforce immigration laws. Boos at anything less than a send-them-all-back immigration policy.

The format of these Republican debates leads to snappy sound bites designed to play to the crowd. The results are rowdy and revealing.

When considering solutions to serious and sensitive issues that impact our society, cheering for people with no health insurance to die, cheering executions and torture, cheering children working as janitors, and booing a soldier because he is gay are inappropriate, out-of-touch, and offensive responses. However at the Republican debates the mere mention of these matters gets the conservative crowd out of their seats and stirred into a mindless, emotional frenzy.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Obama battling against inequality

Over a century ago, in Osawatomie, Kansas, President Theodore Roosevelt's "New Nationalism" speech took on Wall Street.

On December 6, 2011, at Osawatomie High School, Barack Obama channeled Teddy Roosevelt with a populist and powerful speech, laying out his vision and the themes of the 2012 election.

It was a sweeping indictment of economic inequality in the U.S. and a pledge to fight for fairness for the middle class.

President Obama declared, "It's not a view that we should somehow turn back technology or put up walls around America. It's not a view that says we should punish profit or success or pretend that government knows how to fix all society's problems. It's a view that says in America, we are greater together - when everyone engages in fair play, everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share."

In the speech, President Obama said, the number one, defining challenge for the country is income inequality - the giant gap between the middle class and the richest, and between the bottom of the income scale and the richest in America. Things are out of balance, people aren't getting fair shakes. You can't get ahead even if you work hard and you play by the rules.

We have had inequality rising over a decade in which most people have gotten essentially no raise. And, over the last three years, they've gotten whacked by the great recession.

The President made the case that in closing this gap, the government has to be a force. This is a direct contrast to the let markets rule and the get-government-out-of-the-way approach of the Tea Party and many conservatives.

President Obama planted a flag. He has set up, both in the Washington policy fights and in the political 2012 campaign, a very clear difference. The American people have a distinct choice when it comes to economics, Wall Street reform, consumer protection, taxes, and spending in 2012.

What has the conversation been in Washington since the 2010 election? The deficit and debt. Not much has been accomplished and the Super Committee failed.

This summer President Obama really tried to do a bipartisan major deficit and debt reduction with a grand bargain where there would be substantial revenue increases and significant cut backs on spending. It didn't work. The White House has rightly concluded that Republicans have no interest in cooperating.

And, since this summer, as in the case of the Osawatomie, Kansas speech, President Obama has said, no, we're not going to talk about bipartisan deficit reduction - we're going to talk about jobs and about moving the economy forward.

President Obama no longer talks about cooperating with Republicans. He is in their faces.

In the Dec. 6, 2011 speech, President Obama said not only is the middle class not getting a fair deal, but Republicans are part of the reason why.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Super PACs a corrupting influence on American politics

In this Presidential

election cycle, we are experiencing, for the first time, the influence of Super PACs.

They can raise as much money as they want. They can spend as much money as they want

Super PACs exist because of Citizens United, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling against limits on spending by independent political action committees.

The Court said that as long as these committees were independent and didn't give money to candidates, they had no limit at all on what they could spend based on the principle of free speech.

Candidates are allowed to fund raise for these supposedly wholly independent committees. And, close aides, fundraisers, and relatives of the candidates run the Super PACs. The Court did not anticipate the extent to which PAC spending is closely tied to the candidates.

U.S. Senator John McCain blasted the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision which has given rise to the Super PACs and allows corporations to funnel as much money as they'd like into our elections. Senator McCain (who has been a long time advocate for campaign finance reform) said the court's ruling was, "one of the worst decisions I have ever seen." He went on to say, "I predict to you that there will be huge scandals associated with this huge flood of money."

Restore Our Future, a Super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Make Us Greater Again, a Super PAC supporting Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Winning Our Future, a Super Pac supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have already spent millions on predominantly negative attack adds and have had a significant impact on the Republican Presidential nomination process.

A Super PAC has been established to support President Barack Obama's re election.

In addition, there are dozens upon dozens of Super PACs that will be supporting or attacking congressional candidates.

This Presidential election year will be a corrosive year because of the toxic influence of Super PACs. People are going to be offended on all sides - conservatives, moderates, and liberals - to see how these PACs taint and change America's electoral process.

The Supreme Court was wrong in thinking you could have independent spending that was going to be totally independent of candidates. If it's wholly independent, it can't be corrupting. Problem is when someone gives $5 million to Winning Our Future, Newt Gingrich knows exactly who it is.

The Supreme Court's narrow decision, where they voted 5-4 to say corporations are people and money is speech, needs to be reversed or scaled back.

Money is not speech; money can stifle speech. Corporations are important, but they're not people.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

Electronic textbooks in U.S. schools by 2017

Plans are in the works to get all U.S. students from kindergarten through 12th grade digitally connected in five years.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan have joined efforts to bring digital textbooks to U.S. students.

Genachowski and Duncan have launched (on 2/1/12) the Obama administration's "Digital Textbook Playbook." A resource designed by the Digital Textbook Collaborative. The "Playbook" is designed to guide educators in their transition from primarily print to mostly electronic resources.

The Digital Textbook Collaborative is a group convened by the Obama administration. It includes over two-dozen companies and organizations including Apple, Microsoft; the three biggest textbook publishers: Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt, McGraw-Hill, Pearson; and Sprint, and Verizon.

The "Digital Textbook Playbook" guides schools by addressing four main transition issues:

•Switching content to digital formats.

•Establishing internet connectivity throughout the school.

•Establishing internet connectivity throughout the community the school serves.

•Tailoring content to meet the capabilities of particular interactive learning devices used by students.

This initiative does not call for additional U.S. government funding.

The FCC currently provides more than $2.25 billion annually to connect U.S. schools and libraries to high-speed internet service. The FCC now has a pilot program for supporting wireless connectivity for mobile learning devices.

The U.S. currently spends $7 billion a year on textbooks.

The FCC, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Digital Textbook Collaborative will be recommending that states modify the textbook adoption process - allowing K-12 schools to use taxpayer funds (reserved for printed textbooks) on iPads, Kindles, and the like.

In addition, the Obama administration will begin pushing publishers, computer tablet makers, and internet service providers to work together and lower costs. The carrot being the sale of their products to the nation's 50 million school children.

The current K-12 textbook market is antiquated.

Improvements to digital versions of textbooks include interactive, video, and search features. The beefed-up educational content of e-textbooks can offer lesson plans personalized to learning styles and levels, and enable real-time feedback to teachers, tutors, and parents.

I applaud the Obama administration's federal-state-private partnership to drive innovation and the integration of technology into the classrooms, curricula, and the entire educational process in our nation's schools.

The "Digital Textbook Playbook" is a game plan to give high-quality, up-to-date, individualized, and standards-alligned resources to every student in America.

The Obama administration realizes, in order to win the future, our nation's schools need to out-educate the rest of the world.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard Schwab Writes

My Guest Column, "Congress historically unproductive" appeared in today's

1/18/12 Tri-County Press.

Congress historically unproductive  As 2011 has ended,

the first session of the 112th U.S. Congress has stumbled to a bad-faith finish. This Congress has managed to create a disgraceful record of not dealing with the economic crisis facing this nation.

So far this past year, the 112th Congress has passed just 89 bills that President Obama has signed into law. Of those, three named appointees to the Smithsonian Institution, one created a military museum in Texas, and 21 named federal buildings and post offices.

It is a shabby and irresponsible record.

The 112th Congress has spent most of its time racing against the clock - passing short-term extensions to keep Washington open for business and fighting over matters that in the past have been routine.

Three countdowns to shutdown. The will-they-or-won't they over the payroll tax holiday and extension of unemployment benefits. The failed super committee. The debt-ceiling fight which ended in a downgrade. As a result of this brazen unaccountability, and Congressional gridlock caused by the GOP's anti-tax tirades and tantrums and willingness to blow by the debt-limit deadline, Standard and Poors downgraded the U.S. bond rating. A senior director at Standard and Poors remarked, "People in the political arena were talking about a potential default...That a country even has such rhetoric is notable...This kind of rhetoric is not common amongst AAA sovereigns."According to Thomas Mann, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, "This year, blame for Congressional dysfunction isn't equally divided between the two parties. The Republican Party has become just adamant about taking hostages and making non negotiable demands."

The goal of the GOP lawmakers, stated bluntly by Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell is, "to deny President Obama a second term." Everything in the legislative process is part of a permanent campaign to defeat Barack Obama. As a result, we have a do nothing, obstruct everything Congress.

Is it any wonder Congress is down to a record low 9% approval rating? That's 7 percentage points lower than BP's approval rating at the height of the gulf oil spill.

The Republican members of Congress will do their best to sweep this mess under the rug and out of our memories.

Harry Truman ran against the "do nothing" 80th Congress of 1947-48 leading to his surprise victory and the Democratic Party regaining the majority in both houses in the 1948 election.

We may be heading back to the future in 2012.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head,

Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader,

Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)