Alan Grayson

Thanks to El Nino, the upper-atmospheric wind phenomenon that forms every three to five years, no named tropical storms have appeared more than a third of the way through the 2009 hurricane season.

El Nino’s sooner-than-expected development has disrupted the formation of thunderstorms in the Atlantic Ocean that can quickly turn into hurricanes. It also had prompted storm forecasters to scale back predictions.

That insight comes courtesy of scientists in the Rocky Mountains, who have long contributed to preparing Floridians for Mother Nature’s fury.

U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson wants more of that research done closer to home. The Orlando Democrat has proposed – and gotten assurances – for a state-of-the-art $50 million meteorological research site in Central Florida whose main mission would be to improve understanding of hurricane formation and behavior.

The commitment Grayson received from the House leadership and the Obama administration appears to settle the question of whether the weather facility comes to pass.

But some experts wonder exactly what such a facility would do, especially given the amount of current or planned storm research.

Much of the nation’s knowledge about hurricanes comes from a spot in the foothills of the Rockies: Colorado State University in Fort Collins.

Colorado State became the nucleus for storm research in 1960, when the late Herbert Riehl, a renowned storm expert, set up shop there, said Phil Klotzbach, a research scientist at the university.

Other scientists shortly followed, including William Gray, who now leads a team of scientists who each year predict the hurricane activity relied upon by residents and government officials in Florida.

Gray’s team has issued those forecasts since 1984, said Klotzbach.

Grayson, whose district includes much of eastern Marion County including Silver Springs Shores, eastern Ocala and Fort McCoy, convinced House leaders to keep the hurricane item in the chamber’s budget during the June debate on the American Clean Energy and Security Act, known as the cap-and-trade bill.

The wild card is whether the Senate will retain the facility in its budget.

Grayson has said he believes it will remain because the idea is supported by President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman. He recently reiterated that position, noting that the facility is listed in the 1,400-page cap-and-trade bill.

“When the president and the House speaker say it’s going to happen, it’s probably going to happen,” Grayson said in a recent interview.

Grayson’s initial announcement drew some fire.

The Orlando Sentinel editorial page blasted it as a “Category 5 waste” that Congress should reject. The paper argued that Grayson, who indicated the center could be affiliated with the University of Central Florida, was “offering pork when the school needs chicken,” meaning research money for fields such as alternative fuels and biomedical studies.

The paper also criticized Grayson for selling his vote on the energy bill – an allegation he has denied.

Some experts either declined to comment on the plan, or wondered what it would do that is not already being done.

Grayson has maintained the new facility, which could be a source of international study on hurricanes, is needed because the government spends just $2 million a year on hurricane research.

Officials from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which operates the National Hurricane Center in Miami, say the total spent on hurricane-related expenses is hard to pin down.

The costs include aircraft operations, research, satellite operations and weather forecast offices – all of which conduct hurricane-related missions but aren’t solely dedicated to that all year long.

They estimate the agency’s overall hurricane-related expenditures run $300 million a year.

But much of that goes for other purposes or falls outside the scope of what Grayson proposes.

For example, the National Hurricane Center costs $6.9 million a year, but that is strictly for operations done to monitor and report on hurricanes. The center does not do research, officials say.

Jana Goldman, spokeswoman for NOAA, said the agency did not have a position on Grayson’s request.

NOAA records, though, indicate the agency seeks $17 million in next year’s budget for the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project, a multiyear effort that improves hurricane forecasts and warning accuracy. That amount is up $13 million over current funding.

NOAA also wants $10 million for the hurricane division of its Oceanic and Atmospheric Research office, which is up $1 million over the current amount.

Klotzbach opted not to comment at length because he did not want to get entangled in a political debate.

“The more people doing research, the better,” he observed. “But perhaps the money could be spent helping the centers that already do it.”

A Los Angeles Times article on Sunday illustrated how much research is going on.

For example, Florida State University has utilized computer modeling to improve accuracy of hurricane predictions. Scientists in Tallahassee have done so by re-forecasting storm seasons from 1986 through 2005, the Times reported.

The University of Miami is planning to build a $48 million complex – $15 million of which came through a federal grant – to study the effect of hurricane winds battering coastal structures. In a separate program, Florida International University also plans to install a simulator capable of producing 130-mph winds.

Peter B. Ortner, director of the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies at the University of Miami, noted in an interview that his school – in partnership with the universities of Georgia and Oklahoma – is close to winning an award for a $5 million federally funded center that would analyze the effect of wind and water.

The initiative would focus on understanding how hurricanes intensify, but would not involve constructing a new building to house scientists.

Ortner acknowledged research gaps exist that need to be filled.

For instance, he said, forecasters would like to gain knowledge on better communicating storm information to the public and studying how to move people quickly out of the way. That would aid planning and disaster response efforts.

Grayson has said he envisions the Orlando facility providing real-time information to the public and the media to assist with preparations.

Ortner added that there is a “large amount” of research that must be done on understanding intensification of storms, in addition to what his facility might do.

And scientists could benefit if there was better integration among the current research centers.

Beyond that, however, he was puzzled why a new facility would be located in Orlando, when researchers, in Florida at least, have decided Miami is the hub for that.

“It’s not clear where this plays into that. Would they try to move things? That would be counterproductive,” Ortner said. “We need more money, but we don’t need another facility.”

Dennis Ross

The Following was a blog entry on Dennis Ross’ Campaign Site http://www.electdennisross.com ———-

Audit the Federal Reserve?  A recent Rasmussen Reports poll found that 75% of Americans favor auditing the Federal Reserve.  Opponents fear politicizing the actions of a Central Bank.  Both sides have very real and very legitimate concerns, but I believe transparency outweighs potential politicization.

In theory, the “Fed” as it is called, has noble goals.  Stabilizing the money supply, ensuring banks are stable, and engaging foreign monetary and banking institutions for the good of the global economy.  In short, the Fed controls the money supply.  But with such power, the Fed has also been given unbelievable authority while maintaining virtual anonymity.  In and of itself, unchecked authority and lack of transparency are a recipe for disaster.

The great Milton Friedman once said, “The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great Depression by contracting the amount of money in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933.”  A fantastic interview he gave can be read here.  That, in a nutshell, is what the Fed does; expand and contract the money supply.  Recently, however, the Fed has intervened to “bail out” firms such as AIG and Bear Stearns.  (For a good article on why the current crisis is not a liquidity crisis and is more a perception crisis, see Newsweek here)  The decisions of the Fed affect all Americans as we have seen in our current recession.  Surely, you may ask, something with that much power is open to the taxpayer.  Unfortunately, the answer is no and that is why more than 282 Members of Congress have signed on to HR 1207, the Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, and, if I am elected, why I will sign on as well.

Now, many argue that such an audit is unneeded.  They argue that the Fed is already audited by the GAO, although their open market committee is not.  This is to prevent politicizing monetary policy.  However, in such times as these, when trillions of dollars of debt are being added to our children and grandchildren, accountability and not a blank checkbook is needed.  Taxpayers deserve to know not only WHAT is going in and out of the Fed, but more importantly, WHY.  Provide the nation the reasons behind their actions.  Who knows, a majority of Americans might agree that these steps were needed, but they may not.

In the end, auditing an entity with the power to punish our children with mountains of debt, is a moral obligation of this generation.  While the Fed deserves its audit, so does Congress.  Spending, both under the current administration and the former administration, and under the current Congress and the former Congress, remains a disgrace.  Market manipulation through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, social engineering of the housing market by Barney Frank, and now, talk of socialized health care, are just more examples of a city and a group of people disconnected from reality.

Today, when Congress wants to buy hundreds of millions of dollars worth of private jets, we, the taxpayers have to ask ourselves how much more can we take?  In 2010, let us not forget.  I have not forgotten, nor will I ever.  It is time to take our Country back.

Cue the Notre Dame fight song.

Longtime Irish football coach and ESPN analyst Lou Holtz is seriously considering a Congressional campaign against Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-Fla.), first reported by the Orlando Sentinel and confirmed to POLITICO by a senior Republican operative.

Holtz met with National Republican Congressional Committee chairman Pete Sessions last week to express his interest in running for Congress.  The meeting was initiated by Holtz, who flew up from Florida to meet with committee officials.

“It’s a lot more than most celebrity-type candidates do,” said the operative.

Holtz is expected to make his decision in the next several weeks.

Holtz is best-known for his coaching success on the gridiron, leading Notre Dame to a national college football championship in 1988, and later turning around the University of South Carolina’s football program before retiring to ESPN as an analyst.

If he runs, Holtz wouldn’t be guaranteed the GOP nomination. Republicans already have three credible candidates running for the seat – state Reps. Sandy Adams and Dorothy Hukill, and Winter Park Commissioner Karen Diebel. And at 72, Holtz would be one of the oldest members in the House – as a freshman (likely) in the minority.

Holtz, a longtime donor to Republican candidates and causes, stepped into the political spotlight in March, appearing on Sean Hannity’s FOX News show where he expressed his skepticism towards global warming and talked about the high tax rates in Europe.   In a recent Sporting News profile, he said running for public office was number three on his “bucket list” — one of the things he wanted to do in his life.

Holtz’s consideration of a Congressional campaign comes as Sam Wyche, another former football coach, is mulling a campaign for Rep. Gresham Barrett’s seat in South Carolina.

Adam Putnam

Despite support from food-industry allies such as Rep Jim Costa and Rep. Adam Putnam, the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 failed to reach the supermajority needed for passage in the House of Representatives today.

The yeas were 280 and the nays were 150, but the two-thirds supermajority (287) was not reached to pass the bill under a suspension of the rules that limited debate to 40 minutes.

Patrick Delaney, communications manager for the United Fresh Produce Association,Washington, D.C. said United Fresh was exploring the reasons why the bill failed and what the next steps might be for the House food safety legislation.

Opposition from the American Farm Bureau Federation and other agriculture organizations that were wary of Food and Drug Administration encroachment may have cost the bill some votes, though House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., worked with House Energy and Commerce leaders to smooth over worries that the FDA would seek to regulate grain and livestock producers.

While the bill drew some opposition from Republicans in House debate, members of both parties praised the bill as a bipartisan product.

Putnam, R-Fla., praised the effort of Costa, D-Calif., in helping to put together a bill that brings together America’s farmers ranchers and consumers. However, Putnam said a number of features of the bill — particularly language relating to the FDA’s power to quarantine food and mandate traceability — need further work.

Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said the legislation deserves support.

“The process is fair, the product is fair, I strongly encourage a yes vote,” he said during the debate.

“This bill begins a long task of rectifying decades of neglect by updating FDA’s ancient tools outdated mandate,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn.

DeLauro said the bill gives enhance the agency ability to prevent contamination of food by giving the agency the ability to inspect the highest risk facilities once every six months to a year rather than once a decade.

She also said it also enhances reporting requirements for companies and establishing performance standards for fighting food based pathogens.

“This bill is a strong solid first step in creating a food safety system that can protect American families from contaminated food,” DeLauro said.

Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee, said that he objected to the fact the House Agriculture Committee was not involved in putting together the bill and stated his opposition to it.

We did a piece on this so called “Food Safety Bill” not to long ago.  We received several messages from Congressman Putnam’s office regarding the story.  It seems that exemptions were added to the bill.  You can find our original post here

Bill Posey

WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Bill Posey (R-Rockledge) was joined by 30 of his colleagues in introducing legislation to amend Rules of the House to  require a 72 hour period of availability before legislation can be brought up for consideration in the House of Representatives. The bill, H. Res. 689, also requires that a print comparing current law with the proposed law be made available to Members of Congress and the public for at least 72 hours before legislation can be considered.  This not only applies to the underlying bill to be considered but also to any manager’s amendment or other amendment that makes significant changes to the bill.

“The first rule of open government is transparency,” said Congressman Posey. “It’s disrespectful to the American people for Congress to ram through thousands of pages of legislation that no one has had the time to read or understand.  Members of Congress must be given the opportunity to read and digest the massive spending increases and complex statutory changes that are included in many of the bills we are asked to consider. This bill simply lets the sunshine in and encourages public debate and involvement in the issues before Congress.”

Specifically, Posey’s bill requires that legislation be made available to Members of Congress and the public for at least 72 hours before the House may begin debate on the legislation. It also requires that a comparative print showing specifically how the proposed legislation changes current law be made available at least 72 hours before consideration of the bill. The legislation is similar to rules put in place by the Florida legislature to ensure no last minute changes could be made to legislation before a vote.

Posey said that it is important that Members of Congress and the public be given sufficient time and information to understand more fully how the proposed legislation or amendments affect current law. “By requiring the comparative print, Members and the public are given a much better understanding of the overall impact of the bill.”

Adam Putnam

Today Adam Putnam released the following newsletter regarding the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.

Since President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, I have insisted that the Senate hearings move forward with an open mind to learn about her temperament and philosophy. I have also noted the historic nature of her nomination.

Now that we’ve witnessed her demeanor, knowledge of the law and responses to questioning, a more fair judgment may be made.

Judge Sotomayor is undoubtedly an accomplished jurist, but fails to clearly state her view of the Constitution and the fundamental rights enshrined therein. In response to questioning by several Senators on the Judiciary Committee, who were pursuing the basis for her own previous decisions that could imperil rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, she refused to affirm the individual’s right to keep and bear arms.  Given the strong anti-gun agenda of this Administration, and the razor thin margin on the current Court, it is difficult to give this nominee the benefit of the doubt on such an important matter.

I believe a nominee’s philosophy, public commentary and, especially, past decisions are fair game in analyzing a nominee’s suitability for a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest court. In this case, her past decisions and refusal to clarify her philosophy, as it relates to constitutional rights, are troubling enough. Without affirmation of her belief in the fundamental right to keep and bear arms, I would not support her elevation to the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you’re a sportsman that supports the Putnam Campaign, click here to join Adam’s County Leader program.

Suzanne Kosmas

Space Coast Area Transit in Brevard County will receive a $6.9 million grant through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, according to U.S. Rep. Suzanne Kosmas, D-Fla.

The grant will help replace aging buses and vans as well as fund a facelift for the 25-year-old Melbourne bus terminal.

The agency will purchase 16 buses to replace existing buses that are scheduled to reach the end of their useful life next year. It will also purchase 20 replacement vans for its vanpool fleet. The vanpool program allows groups to lease vans from the agency and then drivers and passengers decide on a flexible route and schedule.

Bill Posey

Florida Congressmen Mario Diaz-Balart, Bill Posey and Tom Rooney have been put on the National Republican Congressional Committee’s list of vulnerable incumbents.

Officially they were added to the NRCC’s Patriot Program, which is an attempt to hold the lawmakers accountable for meeting their own fundraising goals in return for party help. How things shake out is unknown, of course. Diaz-Balart was widely said to be in danger of losing last cycle but outlasted the Obama momentum.

On the Democratic side, the GOP views Reps. Suzanne Kosmas and Alan Grayson as the most vulnerable, with Grayson considered the easier target.

Alan Grayson

Three Central Florida congressional representatives joined four colleagues in signing a letter to the U.S. General Accounting Office urging an investigation of allegations that some federal departments have Orlando, Las Vegas and other possible destinations on a no-meetings list.

U.S. Reps. Suzanne Kosmas, D-Fla., Alan Grayson, D-Fla., and John Mica, R-Fla., signed the letter condemning the use of do-not-travel list that allegedly would rule out meetings in some cities, including Orlando, that are known as tourist destinations.

The U.S. Travel Association has led a campaign alleging that such lists exist, but so far no federal agencies has acknowledged that they do. The allegations started last winter when financial companies that received federal bailout money were criticized for holding corporate meetings in resort destinations.

“Such ‘blacklisting’ of specific destinations could result in the waste of taxpayer dollars and is counterproductive to ongoing efforts to strengthen the American economy,” the letter said.

The seven representatives who signed were all from Florida and Nevada, both containing destinations that U.S. Travel said were blacklisted. So far, no blacklists have been confirmed and the White House has said it would oppose such practices.

Bill Posey

Rep. Posey begins by discussing the definition of inflation and then elaborates more on an audit of the Federal Reserve. Bernanke continues his decidedly illogical argument that knowing what the Fed is doing is the same as directing the Fed on monetary policy.

Of note is that Posey uses Judge Napolitano’s quote repeated on Freedom Watch over the past few weeks: “We know more about what the CIA is doing than the Fed”.