VIRTUAL INAUGURAL ADDRESS
VIRTUAL INAUGURAL ADDRESS
As the technologically sophisticated U.S. faces the increasing threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack from a man-made, high altitude nuclear explosion or an “inevitable” massive solar flare, Republicans in the U.S. House are trying to prepare a defense.
They are proposing legislation to protect the vulnerable U.S. electrical grid from an attack so cataclysmic 90 percent of Americans could be affected, including many who would face starvation
The legislation aims to get the federal government to ensure that vital hardware and other devices are installed in the national grid system to protect critical infrastructure such as systems that supply water, food, fuel, communications, transportation, financial transactions and emergency services.
The protection would be employed by hardening the grid to ensure that it can be brought back should it be subjected to such an event.
The alternative, said Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., who will introduce the legislation called the SHIELD Act, could leave the nation without electricity for months and possibly years and affect some 90 percent of the American people, subjecting them to starvation and death.
SHIELD stands for Secure High-voltage Infrastructure for Electricity from Lethal Damage Act.
“This is a problem big enough to be seen but small enough to fix before an EMP happens,” Franks said at a news conference.
He was accompanied by former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who has been outspoken in recent years on the threat of an EMP attack.
Gingrich believes an EMP event is the greatest national security threat facing the United States today.
Franks explained that the U.S. is not more vulnerable than before but has “become a victim of our technological sophistication and scientific advancement.”
“Why does the U.S. need to be vulnerable to such a threat?” he asked. “EMP is the ultimate cyber security threat.”
In terms of coping with external man-made threats, Franks pointed out that Congress has seen to it that the military’s triad of land, sea and air assets has been hardened against the prospect of an EMP attack. Yet, the military is 99 percent dependent on the national grid, making it difficult for it to respond in the event of such an attack.
He pointed out that at the cost of two B-2 strategic bombers, the U.S. could fix the grid so that it could come back in short order should it be brought down.
“The SHIELD Act is a bill that goes in the right direction,” he said.
The legislation passed the House in the last Congress but never made it through the Senate.
Sources on Franks’ staff said that they are actively looking for a Senate version, possibly to be introduced by Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.
The SHIELD Act would amend the Federal Power Act to encourage cooperation between industry and government in developing and implementing standards and processes needed to address the shortcomings and vulnerabilities of the grid to a major EMP event.
It does not include provisions to deal with cyber-security threats which legislators decided to leave to a separate bill. However, Franks said that an EMP attack, whether natural or man-made, would be “the ultimate cyber-security threat.”
The legislation also would give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission authority to develop standards but won’t preclude industry from developing its own.
“This increased authority is necessary to protect the entire grid,” a congressional fact sheet on the SHIELD Act said. “Some industry stakeholders may develop these standards on their own, but unless the entire grid is uniformly resilient to EMP, cascading effects of blackouts resulting from stakeholders that did not protect their entities from EMP will most likely still cause rolling blackouts and massive outages.
“Some industry stakeholders may not view EMP as a credible threat (e.g., Southern stakeholders may not feel threatened by solar storms because of their relative latitudinal protection,” the fact sheet said. “Therefore, we cannot rely on voluntary action by industry stakeholders to protect against this threat.”
The legislation also offers “hardware-based solutions,” available at minimal cost. The hardware will automatically react to an EMP disturbance, removing the “guessing-game” operators currently face.
“If we are going to be serious about avoiding such a catastrophic event” as an EMP, “a priority on this legislation is greater than defense spending,” Gingrich said.
“We can literally see a civilization crash,” he said, referring to the U.S. dependency on the grid’s technology-based infrastructure.
He pointed out that the people of the Netherlands have a particular problem with their dikes. If repair is neglected, he said that more than 40 percent of the country would be underwater. Consequently, he said, there is no question in their minds to maintain the dike system because of this alternative.
The same should apply to the U.S. ensuring protection of the U.S. electrical grid system.
“We could lose 90 percent of the population if an EMP only hit the U.S,” Gingrich asserted.
The U.S. then would have “massive needs of foreign assistance” if no other country were affected.
“That would mean we’d lose our sovereignty,” Gingrich declared.
Peter Vincent Pry, staff director of the original EMP Commission that first revealed the threat of an EMP hit on the nation’s critical infrastructures, pointed out that Russia and China and even North Korea would be the only countries prepared for an EMP event. In effect, they would emerge as the new world leaders.
If the U.S. became disabled from an EMP attack, “is that what we want?”
“The problem,” Franks said, “is fixable.”
Earlier this week, WND reported Maine became the first state in the nation to pass legislation ordering its grid to be hardened against an electromagnetic pulse event.
The law not only requires preparation against a natural or man-made EMP, it encourages other states to take a similar initiative, since the federal government has refused to make the potential for an EMP event a priority.
The Act to Secure the Safety of Electrical Transmission Lines was introduced by Maine Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford.
Responding to a Democratic proposal giving gun owners in Missouri 90 days to turn in rifles, pistols and shotguns deemed to be “assault weapons,” state Rep. Mike Leara (R-St. Louis) introduced a measure on Monday that would make it a felony to propose legislation that further erodes the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
The bill, known as HB 633, was read for the second time on Tuesday.
“Any member of the general assembly who proposes a piece of legislation that further restricts the right of an individual to bear arms, as set forth under the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States, shall be guilty of a class D felony,” the bill says.
A Class D felony in Missouri carries a prison sentence of not more than four years.
“Leara told TheBlaze on Tuesday that he is under no illusion that the bill will pass. He says he introduced the legislation to make a point after Democrats proposed an alarming gun confiscation bill last week,” Jason Howerton wrote.
“It’s outrageous,” Leara said of the Democratic proposal. “I have received an overwhelming response of about 100 to 1 to stop this legislation.”
“I filed HB 633 as a matter of principle and as a statement in defense of the Second Amendment rights of all Missourians. I have no illusions about the bill making it through the legislative process, but I want it to be clear that the Missouri House will stand in defense of the people’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms,” he added.
The Democratic proposal, if passed into law, would give owners of “assault weapons” 90 days to either ship the weapons out of the state, render them inoperable or surrender them to authorities. Those who fail to do so could be sent to prison for a period of seven years.
Legislation mirroring the Missouri bill was proposed in Minnesota.
According to Leara, Democratic Rep. Rory Ellinger, the primary sponsor of the gun confiscation bill, calls himself a constitutional lawyer.
Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming plans to introduce legislation Monday to preempt the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) plan to regulate carbon emissions, The Daily Caller has learned. It is the latest move by congressional Republicans who view the agency’s rules as a backdoor attempt to implement a cap and trade system.
“Barrasso’s bill stops this backdoor attempt to enact Obama’s cap-and-trade agenda through EPA and the rest of the federal bureaucracy,” said Barrasso spokesperson Emily Lawrimore. “The Barrasso bill restates and reaffirms the will of Congress as the sole authority over federal climate change policy.”
The bill, however, will go beyond just blocking the EPA. It will stop all federal agencies from implementing new energy taxes that could have a negative effect on employment and energy costs.
Barrasso’s bill builds off an amendment introduced last spring by then-Ohio Republican Sen. George Voinovich that would have blocked the EPA and individual U.S. states from regulating greenhouse gases.
While Voinovich’s amendment and the climate bill it was attached to never passed, Barrasso has used the Voinovich amendment as a template for his standalone bill. According to Lawrimore, the specifics of the bill are still being worked out.
Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, is also working on crafting legislation to stop the EPA. According to Inhofe spokesperson Matt Dempsey, the senator is working closely with Michigan Rep. Fred Upton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to coordinate a strategy.
While the Republican-controlled House could easily pass a full preemption bill, things will be harder in the Senate. Any success in passing a bill in the Senate will likely come down to persuading moderate Democrats to support it.
————————— CLICK HERE TO VISIT THE DAILY BENEFACTOR —————————
————————————————————- TOP STORY ————————————————————-
Rep. Robert Brady (D-PA) will introduce legislation this week that will criminalize inflammatory language.
Democrats are still blaming Sarah Palin and conservatives for the shooting in Tucson by an anti-Christian, anti-Constitution, left-wing, pro-Marx, antiflag, “quite liberal” lunatic.
Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official.
Brady’s decision to offer the legislation comes less than 24 hours after a gunman attempted to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona, in a shooting that claimed the lives of a federal judge, and a nine year-old girl, among others.
“The president is a federal official,” Brady said in a telephone interview with CNN. “You can’t do it to him; you should not be able to do it to a congressman, senator or federal judge.
“This is not a wake up call, this is major alarms going off,” he said.
Brady is particularly incensed over a web posting by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin during the 2010 election in which she targeted 20 House Democrats, including Giffords for political defeat. The posting showed a map of the United States with the 20 Democratic congressional districts identified by gun sights.
“You can’t put bulls eyes or crosshairs on a United States congressman or a federal official,” Brady said. “I understand this web site that had it on there is no longer in existence. Someone is feeling a little guilty.”
After the shooting democrats immediately plotted to blame the tea party for the shootings by the young leftist crackpot.
—————————————————— NOTE TO READERS ——————————————————
THE DAILY BENEFACTOR now provides you with a large selection of NEWS WIDGETS containing RSS feeds from the most comprehensive news sources on the internet, such as THE DRUDGE REPORT, GATEWAY PUNDIT, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, WORLDNETDAILY, POLITICO, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, CNS, MICHELLE MALKIN, BREITBART, and THE JERUSALEM POST. Check them out!