Big Oil Has Flourished, Despite Biden's Best Efforts, And Will Back Trump In 2024

 “It’s death by 1,000 cuts. It’s the worst presidency with regard to energy policy I’ve ever seen — and I’ve been involved in energy for 40 years, my entire career.”

Those were the words of Steve Pruett, chief executive of Elevation Resources, to Financial Times last week, talking about how the Biden Administration has gone out of its way to make life difficult for the energy sector. 

After the deregulation seen during Donald Trump's presidency, a tailwind for the sector, President Biden has prioritized tackling climate change and promised to regulate the oil and gas sectors more tightly.

His administration has introduced a range of environmental regulations, including endangered species protections, methane leak controls, and limits on offshore leasing and new licenses for liquefying and exporting American gas. All the while he has been draining the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve while trying to cover up the tracks of inflation that is spinning out of control under his watch. 

While many Democratic voters see these regulations as necessary, they have certainly rendered Biden unpopular in Midland, Texas, FT writes.

Midland lies at the core of the Permian Basin, which produces over 6.1 million barrels of oil a day—more than some OPEC nations—positioning the US as the largest oil producer globally.

FT notes that with the presidential election six months away, energy policy is a major divide between Biden and Trump. Despite Biden's best efforts, U.S. oil production has soared to record levels, over 13 million barrels per day, boosted by commodity price increases following Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Investors have seen substantial returns, with ExxonMobil shares - one of our favorite investments we have been touting for years - doubling since Biden's inauguration.

Nonetheless, industry insiders believe these achievements have happened despite White House policies, not because of them, and fear further regulations could harm the sector long-term.

Stephen Robertson, executive vice-president of the Permian Basin Petroleum Association commented: “In Biden’s campaign to become president, he said he was going to end the oil and gas industry — he is doing that.”

“There have been over 200 actions taken by this administration opposed to the oil and gas industry. There’s not one of these that will be the end of the industry . . . but there’s going to be a straw that breaks the camel’s back.”

Biden said while campaigning in 2020: “The oil industry pollutes significantly. It has to be replaced by renewable energy over time.”

In 2024, the oil industry will be behind Trump. FT notes that Pennsylvania, a key swing state and the second-largest shale gas producer in the U.S. after Texas, plays a crucial role in presidential elections. Trump won the state in 2016, but Biden narrowly took it in 2020.

Biden's suspension of new LNG permits has been unpopular in Pennsylvania, where the oil and gas sector employs around 80,000 people. Trump, promising to reverse this policy, was met with strong support at a recent rally in the swing state.

Even local Democrats, including Governor Josh Shapiro, a Biden ally, have opposed the freeze and urged its repeal.

Alexandra Adams at the National Resources Defense Council, a non-profit added: “From day one, the Biden administration has made a strong commitment to addressing climate change.”

But Biden's energy policies, aiming to reduce oil and gas pollution, have sparked significant opposition from the industry, which fears these measures will limit future U.S. production and energy security.

This conflict intensified as Biden took actions like suspending new LNG terminal licenses and restricting offshore drilling, despite oil and gas production reaching record highs under his administration. Industry stakeholders argue these regulations threaten investments and job stability, particularly affecting smaller companies that cannot easily absorb new costs.

Now, as election tensions rise, the industry is heavily funding campaigns advocating for fewer restrictions and promoting fossil fuel reliance, signaling deep concerns about the potential impacts of continued regulatory changes.

Harold Hamm, founder of Continental Resources told Financial Times: “We have what we call punitive regulation and punitive policy that has been brought about by this administration.”

Mike Sommers, head of the American Petroleum Institute concluded: “We need predictability. And when governments change rules at the drop of a hat without much consultation that sends a signal that if you’re going to invest in that place your investment may be at risk.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/big-oil-has-flourished-despite-bidens-best-efforts-and-will-back-trump-2024

Biden Admin Hiding Intel on Location of Hamas Leaders in Betrayal of Israel: WaPo

 Joe Biden has been hiding intelligence on the whereabouts of Hamas leaders and their command tunnels, depriving Israel of vital information that could lead to an end to the war. That revelation came in a report on Saturday and was framed as the administration offering that information now if the ongoing operation in Rafah is canceled. 

The story first broke in The Washington Post, with the paper describing the offer as follows. 

The Biden administration, working urgently to stave off a full-scale Israeli invasion of Rafah, is offering Israel valuable assistance if it holds back, including sensitive intelligence to help the Israeli military pinpoint the location of Hamas leaders and find the group’s hidden tunnels, according to four people familiar with the U.S. offers.

There's no other way to read this except that the Biden administration has been protecting Hamas. If intelligence exists that can help "pinpoint the location of Hamas leaders," it should have been given to Israel the moment it was produced. The same goes for any information about the terror tunnels. 

Why was that information held back from Israel? Was the White House trying to appease Iran by ensuring Hamas' survival? Or was Biden concerned about the domestic backlash from the far left if he had a hand in eliminating Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar? 

To only offer this intelligence after Israel called Biden's bluff on Rafah smacks of political gamesmanship, with the president's political fortunes being put over the lives of the hostages, including the several Americans still being held captive.

Former Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren had this to say about the situation. 

The scandalous part of the situation aside, there's also an inherent contradiction on display. Biden is telling the Israelis he will give them information on the location of Hamas leaders while at the same time demanding they not attack their geographic location in Rafah. 

In other words, this seems like a meaningless promise from the White House. It's a desperate, pathetic attempt to get Israel to call off its final blow against Hamas. At this point, the Israelis don't need the intelligence because they will find the terror tunnels themselves once they take Rafah. They should tell Biden to go pound sand over this betrayal.

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/05/12/bombshell-biden-administration-has-been-holding-back-intel-from-israel-on-location-of-hamas-leaders-n2174088

Is pharma’s interest in orphan drugs waning?

 For many years, orphan drugs for rare diseases have been a draw for pharma companies, offering high prices, swift regulatory reviews, and often extended marketing exclusivity – but there are signs they may be losing their allure.

A new analysis by Evaluate has found that, while there is still plenty of interest in the category, sales growth is starting to level off and being caught by non-orphan drugs, in part because of a resurgence of effort in widespread diseases like obesity and immunological and neurological disorders, such as multiple sclerosis, depression, and anxiety.

Payers may also be focusing more on big health challenges at the population level, rather than rare conditions, and have started to baulk at the premium pricing for orphan drugs, according to Evaluate’s 2024 Orphan Drug Report.

The analysis notes that orphan drug sales growth averaged almost 11% annually in the 10 years to 2023 – reaching a market value of $168 billion worldwide – but will “barely make double digits” for the rest of the decade.

That’s still a healthy rate of growth, of course, resulting in an estimated market value of almost $270 billion in 2028, and Evaluate says that the slowdown in the orphan category is relative, retaining roughly the same proportion of the overall prescription medicines.

“High prices, small trials, well-defined populations and development incentives continue to buoy this important sector. So does regulators’ flexibility in offering expedited market access for drugs addressing unmet needs,” according to the report, which notes that almost 60% of the FDA’s new drug approvals in 2023 were for orphan drugs.

The category will remain a strategic priority for pharmaceutical companies for good reason, given that the top 10 orphan drugs will collectively generate more than $57 billion in 2028, according to Evaluate.

It predicts that the top three sellers in that year will be Johnson & Johnson’s blood cancer drug Darzalex (daratumumab), Vertex’s Trikafta (elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor) for cystic fibrosis (CF), and Roche’s Hemlibra (emicizumab) for haemophilia A treatment, retaining their current podium positions.

There will be some new products among the lower end of the list, however, with big gains expected for Incyte and Novartis’ Jakafi (ruxolitinib) for myelofibrosis, Johnson & Johnson’s Carvykti (ciltacabtagene autoleucel) for bone marrow cancers, and BeiGene’s Brukinsa (zanubrutinib), supplanting AbbVie’s big-selling Imbruvica (ibrutinib) on the top 10 list after besting it in a comparative trial. The full list can be viewed here.

When it comes to pipeline prospects, Evaluate thinks the top five are Vertex’s VX-121 triple for CF, J&J’s nipocalimab with potential across a range of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, Intellia Therapeutics’ NTLA-2002 for hereditary angioedema, and cancer drugs paltusotine from Crinetics Pharma and bemarituzumab from Amgen.

“Even with the anticipated moderation in growth, orphan drugs continue to punch above their weight class in terms of value,” said Daniel Chancellor, director of thought leadership at Evaluate.

“It’s not surprising that we’d see this moderation as orphan drugs become a mainstream business,” he added, pointing out that the category was only a little behind the value of the oncology market, which was worth $194 billion last year.

One factor that needs to be considered, however, is the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in the US, which Evaluate predicts could have an “outsized effect” on orphan drugs. For example, Imbruvica came into the picture for Medicare pricing negotiations because it has multiple indications, so cannot claim the IRA exemption for single-indication orphan drugs.

https://pharmaphorum.com/news/pharmas-interest-orphan-drugs-waning

Theory of Global Warming Versus the Rhymes of Dr. Seuss

 

“How big is the sun? We just heard right this minute a million of our earths could all fit right in it.” Those words can be found in Dr. Seuss children’s book There’s No Place Like Space: All About Our Solar System.

About what you’re about to read, it won’t be a statistical or scientific argument supporting or disdaining the theory that is global warming. No such skills exist to make either, but even if they did exist, the view here is that statistical arguments about anything involving personal freedom are loser arguments. Think back to the spring of 2020 and the coronavirus to see why.

Back then those who were properly against the taking of freedom frequently employed statistics to make their cases against lockdowns. They would cite information regularly published in the New York Times revealing that nearly half of those who died with the virus were in nursing homes. Countless others cited CDC stats about those who died with the virus having frequently had multiple illnesses of the lethal variety.

The arguments were compelling at first glance, at second glance senseless, and at third glance dangerous. Think about it. They implied that if viruses were lethal enough, and killed enough babies or adults in the “crucial” 18-34 demographic, that lockdowns would be justified. Hopefully readers can see the danger. Statistical arguments about matters involving freedom imply that the latter can and should be given away if enough of the mob feels we’re in trouble.

The theory that is global warming is no different. Those who reject the theory, or those who accept the theory but not the draconian solutions to it, fight with statistics and tenths of a degree. As with the debates about the political response to the virus, statistical arguments about warming are compelling at first glance, at second glance they’re senseless, and at third glance they’re dangerous.

As with the virus, statistical arguments shift the terms of the debate onto the premise of the warming theorists, and much worse, they imply a willingness to hand over living standards and freedoms said to the be the cause of the theory that is global warming. No thanks.

Freedom and the ability for free people to progress in how they live can’t fall victim to theories and/or statistics. Which is why no argument will be offered here. Freedom isn’t something to be negotiated. The view here is that Dr. Seuss provides a better answer as is. See above.

The sun that warms Planet Earth could house a million earths. Please stop and think about that. Planet Earth is pretty vast, yet the sun could fit something like a million earths? Sorry, but the vastness of the sun thoroughly mocks not just those who employ statistics to support their hysteria about a warming earth, but it also mocks those who fancy themselves the betters of the warming hysterics by employing statistics that reject the hysteria.

More realistically, the sun stands down to no individual, or collection of individuals. To presume that the giving up of freedom or living standards will somehow alter the course of an earth warmed by something as vast as the sun brings new meaning to fatal conceit. Sorry, but that which is a millions times the size of the earth will in no way have its impact altered by the near, near-term inhabitants of the third rock.

John Tamny is editor of RealClearMarkets, President of the Parkview Institute, a senior fellow at the Market Institute, and a senior economic adviser to Applied Finance Advisors (www.appliedfinance.com). His latest book, released on April 16, 2024 and co-authored with Jack Ryan, is Bringing Adam Smith Into the American Home: A Case Against Homeownership. 

https://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2024/05/11/the_theory_of_global_warming_versus_the_rhymes_of_dr_seuss_1030953.html

Biden hostage betrayal

 Does President Joe Biden even know that Hamas is holding five American hostages? Does anybody in his administration care? Do the administration’s water carriers in the liberal media care, either?

One would think not, judging by the rarity of mentions of this crisis by the president, his spokespeople, or the news media. The absence of focused public concern is inexcusable. Even more inexcusable, unless there are covert operations in the offing, is the lack of action, whether diplomatic or by military special forces, to try to return U.S. citizens to safety and freedom.

Biden seems primarily concerned with putting counterproductive pressure on Israel to stop its military actions without putting equal or greater pressure on Hamas. His inattention to the American hostages is astonishing. He met their families in December and featured them as guests on March 7 at his State of the Union speech. On April 24, he also quietly met with one of the few hostages who has been released, 4-year-old Abigail Mor Edan. But Biden left it to national security adviser Jake Sullivan to say anything about the meeting.

The president seems not to want to be seen involving himself in the issue. A cynic might think he is keen to avoid being tainted by their captivity in an election year. That cynic might also think that he especially wants to avoid the subject because it makes the terrorists look bad and his far-Left supporters, who believe only Israel can be evil, don’t like the counter-narrative of facts. 

Biden issued an anodyne joint statement with 16 other nations on April 25, but other than such occasional references and minimal expressions of concern, the past seven months have been notable for his relative silence. Neither Biden nor his appointees nor the media seem even to mention the hostages’ names.

Biden doesn’t make them a public part of his diplomacy. He demanded a ceasefire from Israel. He is withholding from Israel arms shipments specifically authorized by law. Yet nowhere does he declare that Hamas’s release of the five Americans is a nonnegotiable predicate for any ceasefire.

He should go further: Rather than pressuring Israel to stop military operations, he should warn Hamas that until it releases hostages, he will not lift a finger to dissuade Israel from any action it wishes to take against the terrorist regime. He should threaten U.S. action targeting Hamas’s leaders wherever they may be while the hostages remain in captivity.

If you type “hostage crisis” into a search engine, you are offered information about news events not now but from 44 years ago. That is partly because U.S. hostages were taken seriously back then — far more so than now. The Iran hostage crisis of 1979-81 was a daily national anxiety. For 444 days, network anchors led every newscast with stories about the hostages’ fates. The contrast with today, when Iran’s proxies are holding Americans, is stunning.

No administration should allow its national security aims to be determined exclusively by the condition of hostages. Nor should it weakly beg for their release. But there should be a proper balance of presidential and media pressure to secure freedom for captive Americans even while keeping the national interest clearly in mind.

The news media’s left-wing straitjacket no longer allows reporters to see themselves, even in appropriate circumstances, as Americans first. If you’re just a “citizen of the world,” you refuse to see American hostages as being of any particular concern, and certainly less important than castigating Israel when bombs fired by terrorists fall on Gazan hospital parking lots.

Hostages Edan Alexander, Omer Neutra, Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Sagui Dekel-Chen, and Keith Siegel deserve better from our nation’s president and its news media. The silence is shameful.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2997426/the-biden-hostage-betrayal/

US Families Bear Financial Burden Of Biden’s Border Catastrophe

 As House Republicans consider new legislation to guard against the threat of non-citizens voting in elections, urgent action is also needed to stop the federal government from raiding Americans’ pocketbooks to fund welfare and other programs for illegal aliens.

While estimates vary widely, there are likely at least 15 million individuals illegally residing in the United States following four years of the worst border crisis in history under Joe Biden. According to some calculations, the number of illegal aliens in the country has already more than doubled under Biden, and could double again if he wins another term.

The tragic human cost of this invasion, seen clearly in horrific violent crimes like the murder of Laken Riley and the record high number of fentanyl overdoses last year, is obvious.

But the border crisis is also decimating American families and communities in ways that don’t make as many headlines. One of the most harmful is the sheer financial cost to American taxpayers of taking in tens of millions of illegal immigrants.

According to a report from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), U.S. taxpayers are now shelling out at least $150.7 billion annually for illegal aliens – a figure greater than the annual GDP of 15 states, and equivalent to more than $1.5 trillion over a 10-year budget window.

Put another way, each illegal alien costs U.S. taxpayers about $8,776 each year. That means each U.S. taxpayer is on the hook for about $956 every year to pay for services for illegal aliens.

In some states, that number is even higher. In California, the cost per illegal alien to state taxpayers is $7,074. In Massachusetts it’s $7,396. In Hawaii it’s a staggering $9,178.

While pro-immigration groups have argued that illegal aliens still pay some taxes, FAIR found that “taxes paid by illegal aliens only cover around 17.2 percent of the costs they create for American citizens.”

Many of these costs come from welfare programs. Although illegal aliens themselves are ineligible for most welfare, their U.S.-born children are not – in effect creating a loophole allowing millions of illegal aliens to obtain taxpayer-funded welfare benefits.

According to testimony delivered to Congress earlier this year from Steven Camarota, Director of the Center for Immigration Studies, “59 percent of households headed by illegal immigrants use one or more major welfare programs, compared to 39 percent of households headed by the U.S.-born.” Camarota also reported that the lifetime cost of each illegal alien to U.S. taxpayers is about $68,000.

More specifically, according to FAIR, each year illegal aliens with U.S.-born children receive about $5.8 billion in food stamps, $1.6 billion from the Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service, $1.4 billion from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, and $1 billion from the WIC program.

But it’s not just illegal alien welfare that’s impacting Americans’ finances. The children of illegal aliens, many of whom qualify for special programs for children who don’t speak English as their first language, cost the education system about $73 billion per year. While children deserve an opportunity to receive an education, it is only right that American taxpayer dollars should go toward funding the education of the children of American taxpaying citizens. The populations of illegal aliens coming in across the southern border are overwhelmingly a net-drain on local resources and social services.

Taxpayers are also being forced to shell out their hard-earned dollars to pay for medical care for illegal aliens. The total cost of just improper Medicaid payouts to illegal aliens is estimated to be north of $8 billion annually. As of this March, six states also offer fully state-funded coverage to eligible residents regardless of immigration status.

The added strain on the justice system from Biden’s migrant invasion is also costing Americans. States are now spending about $3.1 billion annually on border security, while the federal government spends $1.6 billion per year on incarcerated illegal aliens.

Numbers aside, news stories on the Biden administration providing smartphones to illegal aliens and housing them in luxury accommodations are also sure to elicit outrage from hard-working Americans struggling under the weight of inflation and a stagnant economy.

Retired Professor of Economics Theo Hiltraud Gutermuth, a former German and Italian university lecturer who also led a German Christian Democrat committee on migration analysis in the 1980s, told me, “America has to decide soon whether it can assimilate this inflow.”

“Until the end of the Cold War, immigrants were typically hesitant about benefiting from welfare,” Professor Gutermuth noted. “They had their pride, but this has changed,” he added, suggesting that the U.S. should consider a temporary pause in immigration. “This solution is not only politically sound but also economically viable,” said Professor Gutermuth, expressing his concern that “this immense burden is becoming unsustainable, even for America.”

With Biden in office, the surge of illegal aliens into the country will almost certainly continue. But as American voters increasingly feel the weight of Biden’s border crisis in their communities and more importantly in their wallets, they will likely be eager to make a change in leadership.

https://amac.us/newsline/economy/american-families-bear-financial-burden-of-bidens-border-catastrophe/

Kaiser Permanente to sell private-fund stakes due to cash constraints

 U.S. not-for-profit healthcare network Kaiser Permanente is planning to sell off large private-investment holdings due to cash constraints, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.

Kaiser has been working with investment bank Jefferies Financial Group in recent months to sell up to $3.5 billion of private-fund stakes to secondary buyers, the Journal said, citing people involved with secondary deals.

Kaiser is expected to offer a similar sized collection later this year, according to the report.

Kaiser and Jefferies did not immediately respond to Reuters' request for comment.

Kaiser is one of the largest U.S. medical employers with over 24,000 doctors and 73,000 nurses. It operates with 40 hospitals and has over 618 medical offices, according to its website.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/kaiser-permanente-sell-private-fund-131419330.html