http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/01/26/fact-sheet-president-obama-s-blueprint-make-most-america-s-energy-resour

FACT SHEET:

In his State of the Union Address, President Obama laid out a Blueprint for an America Built to Last, underscoring his commitment to an all-of-the-above approach that develops every available source of American energy. This commitment includes the safe and responsible production of our oil and natural gas resources. Today, American oil production is at the highest level in eight years and last year we relied less on foreign oil than in any of the past 16 years.

At the same time, the President believes we need to double-down on clean energy in the United States. Transitioning to cleaner sources of energy will enhance our national security, protect the environment and public health, and grow our economy and create new jobs. Over the past few years, renewable energy use has nearly doubled. In fact, in 2011, the United States reclaimed the position as the world’s leading investor in clean energy – but staying on top will depend on smart, aggressive action moving forward.

President Obama will begin the second day of his post-State of the Union swing with an event at a UPS facility in Las Vegas, focusing on the importance of American workers developing American-made energy for an economy that’s built to last. Following this event, the President will travel to Buckley Air Force Base in Aurora, Colorado to deliver remarks on American energy and the steps his Administration is taking to promote energy security.

President Obama’s Plan to Advance Safe Production of Oil and Gas Resources To Create Jobs, Enhance Energy Security, and Cut Pollution

Make a new lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico to move forward on our national commitment to safe and responsible oil and gas development: In his State of the Union Address, the President directed the Department of Interior to finalize a national offshore energy plan that makes 75% of our potential offshore resources available for development by opening new areas for drilling in the Gulf and Alaska. On Thursday, the President will take a concrete step forward to develop our oil and gas resources, announcing that the Department of Interior will hold a new lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico. This lease sale will make approximately 38 million acres available, and could result in the production of 1 billion barrels of oil and 4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

Promote safe, responsible development of the near 100-year supply of natural gas, supporting more than 600,000 jobs while ensuring public health and safety: In 2009, we became the world’s leading producer of natural gas. In the State of the Union, the President directed the Administration to ensure safe shale gas development that, according to independent estimates, will support more than 600,000 jobs by the end of the decade. These actions will include moving forward with common-sense new rules to require disclosure of the chemicals used in fracking operations on public lands.

Reducing our dependence on oil by encouraging greater use of natural gas in transportation: The President’s plan includes: proposing new incentives for medium- and heavy-duty trucks that run on natural gas or other alternative fuels; launching a competitive grant program to support communities to overcome the barriers to natural gas vehicle deployment; developing transportation corridors that allow trucks fueled by liquefied natural gas to transport goods; and supporting programs to convert municipal buses and trucks to run on natural gas and to find new ways to convert and store natural gas.

Harnessing American ingenuity to catalyze breakthrough technologies for natural gas: The Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy (ARPA-E) will announce a new research competition in the coming months that will engage our country’s brightest scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs to find ways to harness our abundant supplies of domestic natural gas to lessen our dependence of foreign oil for vehicles. The breakthrough technologies they will develop, whether they are for new ways to fuel our cars with natural gas or a method to turn that gas into liquid fuel, promise to break our dependence on foreign oil for our cars and trucks, allow us to breathe cleaner air, and ultimately save consumers at the pump. To date ARPA-E has hosted four rounds of competitions and attracted over 5000 applications from research teams, which has resulted in approximately 180 cutting edge projects.

The President’s Commitment to Clean Energy

Doubling the share of electricity from clean energy sources by 2035: The centerpiece of the Administration’s strategy is a Clean Energy Standard, or “CES” – a flexible approach that harnesses American ingenuity and innovation, and channels it toward a clean energy future. By creating a market here at home for innovative clean energy technologies, we will unleash the ingenuity of our entrepreneurs and ensure that America leads the world in clean energy.

Supporting clean energy with targeted tax incentives: The President supports renewing and extending a number of proven and successful provisions that are crucial to the continued growth of the domestic clean energy sector. This includes tax incentives for clean energy manufacturing, which could create up to 100,000 jobs, and the Production Tax Credit to support investment in the deployment of clean energy technologies like wind and solar.

Opening public lands for private investments in clean energy: To enhance energy security and create new jobs, the Department of the Interior is committed to issuing permits for 10 gigawatts of renewable generation capacity – enough to power 3 million homes – from new projects on our public lands by the end of 2012.

Securing renewable energy for the U.S. Navy: Securing a safe, clean and reliable energy supply for our nation’s defense forces is essential to carrying out missions vital to the security of the United States. The Department of Navy has committed to adding 1 gigawatt of renewable energy produced from sources like solar, wind, and geothermal to its energy portfolio for shore-side installations – enough to power 250,000 homes.  Using existing authorities such as power purchase agreements, the Navy will ensure these energy projects are cost neutral and require no up-front investments by the government.

Grant paying for pilot program.

By KEVIN ALLEN

South Bend Tribune

5:29 PM EST, January 19, 2012

SOUTH BEND — The city is testing an idea that could lighten its electric bills.

Thanks to an $18,750 grant from Wells Fargo, city officials are going to see if a new technology can cut the amount of power needed to light South Bend’s streets.

Jon Burke, the city’s municipal energy director, said Thursday that the city will use about two-thirds of that money to install induction lights in some areas of down-town. The other third will be spent on urban-agriculture programs in the city.

Burke said induction lighting consumes about half the energy of conventional lighting.

He said the pilot project could grow into a larger partnership with Indiana Michigan Power to replace about 13,000 street lights throughout South Bend. The city pays about $85,000 a month to light city streets.

“If we can deploy this kind of technology,” Burke said, “in the long term, once the capital investment is paid off, we could potentially save a very large portion of that $85,000 per month.”

Induction lights also re-quire less maintenance, Burke said, because they have a longer life than conventional and LED lights.

The lighting project is part of an effort to devise a larger strategic energy plan for the city. Mayor Pete Buttigieg said that plan will be rolled out later this year.

Burke said the goal for the urban-agriculture portion of the grant is to support a gardening group in each quadrant of the city.

Staff writer Kevin Allen:
kallen@sbtinfo.com
574-235-6244

InsideINdianaBusiness.com Report

Colorado-based Abound Solar says it remains on track to hire at least 850 people by 2014. Marketing Communications Manager Becky Ellzey tells Inside INdiana Business crews continue to work on turning an empty Tipton County building into a usable facility. Ellzey says the company plans to begin hiring workers in the second half of 2012.

Ellzey says the building currently has no utility services. She says work to make the building usable will likely continue through the first half of 2012.

Abound Solar originally announced plans to bring jobs to the area in 2010. At that time, the Indiana Economic Development Corporation offered the company more than $12 million in performance-based tax credits and training grants.

The Tipton County factory has been empty since Chrysler Group LLC and Getrac Transmission Manufacturing LLC bailed on plans to move in more than three years ago.

Source: Inside INdiana Business

Posted: 01/10/2012 at 1:15 am

GOSHEN — Lucid Energy will ask the Goshen Redevelopment Commission this afternoon to be allowed to back out of a lease for the powerhouse at the north end of the Millrace Canal.

Lucid planned to use the site as a local test-bed for its own hydroelectric generating equipment.

It applied for a preliminary permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to generate power at the site, but because of the time and expense of a full permit, Lucid decided to apply for an exemption, Lucid representatives told the commission last year.

The word Lucid got from FERC was that a decision was coming — soon. Soon dragged on, though.

“Due to the extended period of time it took FERC to make a decision, Lucid has made other arrangements for a test site,” wrote Mark Brinson, Goshen community development director, in a report to the commission in advance of today’s meeting.

By the time it got the approval a few months ago, it was only for 18 months, far short of the 5-year term of the lease Lucid entered into with the commission.

The lease was contingent on Lucid getting approval for power generation. Payments were to start after the company got approval from FERC.

Since that happened, the company could owe $3,600 to the city for the lease up until this point.

Lucid’s Tim Braun will give the commission details today and ask to get out of the lease, which called for payments of $450 a month and included a $3,000 up-front fee.

For more information on Lucid Energy visit: http://www.lucidenergy.com/

Although I do applaud Governor Daniels move to lift the strict security measures at the State House, I do believe there is a need to enforce noise levels. I could be wrong but at times I felt that the decibel level generated by rallies and protests exceeded reasonable indoor decibel levels. The excessive noise generated by beating objects was disruptive to the point where a person could not hear themselves think no less have a conversation on their cell phone in the hallways. I sincerely hope that there is a way to impose reasonable noise restrictions without infringing on the public’s First Amendment Rights to “freedom of speech.” Maybe state lawmakers need to investigate a law to regulate “indoor noise pollution”. Yes, it does really exist my friends. That’s just my two cents.

Laura Ann Arnold

11:26 AM, Jan. 4, 2012

Written by Mary Beth Schneider, Indianapolis Star

Gov. Mitch Daniels this morning rescinded the new security policy which had limited public access to the Statehouse.

Daniels said he made the decision this morning after consulting with legislative leaders and taking into consideration public reaction to the new rules, which had capped access at about 3,000.

“I’ve asked the fire marshal to rescind the new policy and to restore the traditional unlimited access here to the building,” Daniels said. “That’s in place right now. All three doors are open. … We will do that unless and until there’s a problem.”

Daniels said that “anything goes” policy will continue “as long as that works.”

If situations arise where public safety is endangered, he said, the police “have my authority to do something different at that point.”

Daniels said the security issues were “not idle concerns.”

But, he added, “Indiana respects fervently the rights of minorities” including those of labor union members.

He said that the protests last year resulted in some groups, including schools, canceling trips.

“There has to be some balance but I want to show respect to those who argued against the new (security) policy. They made good points,” he said. “When it comes to a call here, they are right that we should err on the right of openness and hope there’s not a problem. If one develops, deal with it then.”

Daniels said it will be up to the Indiana State Police to decide whether to reduce the massive police presence at the building. While traditionally a handful of state police are posted at entrances and exits to the building, and in key places such as the governor’s office, today — the opening day of the legislative session — there were dozens of police, some with guard dogs, inside and outside the building. Long lines of the public, most of them union members here to protest the so-called “right to work” legislation,” queued outside the east entrance, the only door open to the general public.

Lobbyists, reporters with ID badges and those with scheduled visits such as tour groups had expedited entry through the west entrance.

The policy was announced on Dec. 30, and immediately was viewed by some as an attempt to stifle the union protests against the “right to work” legislation, which bans companies and unions from negotiating a contract that requires non-members to pay fees. Daniels and GOP legislative leaders have made its passage their top priority this session.

Its passage from committee in 2011 sparked both large union protests and a five-week walk-out by House Democrats who wanted to stop it and other bills aimed at unions and public education. While it was pulled from the table in the 2011 session, the bill is expected to pass this session due to the large Republican majorities in both the House and Senate who favor it.

But police said the protests of 2011 convinced them they needed stronger security policies in the building. This morning, the Statehouse resembled an armed fortress, with police even guarding one elevator that was designated for use by elected officials and their staff. Rescinding the policy restored that elevator to public use.

Labor union protesters said they felt the large police presence was meant to intimidate them. One Republican lawmaker, State Rep. Tom Saunders, said he found it an “embarrassment.”

Daniels said he initially did not overrule the state police recommendations because he considers himself a “temporary occupant” of the building. But reading what was said about the rules and listening to the criticism, he said, he decided Indiana should return to the old rules.

“We may have one of the most open, if not the most open, environment of any place. It’s fine. We like it that way, as long as it works,” he said.

We all understand the need for tight security at the Statehouse. For years, in fact, I questioned why visitors could walk into the state’s most notable government building without having to go through even the most basic security check.

It seemed as if Indiana officials, in their admirable quest to hold onto the tradition of openness at the Statehouse, hadn’t accounted for events such as the Oklahoma City bombing and the 9/11 attacks. They finally relented and added screening checkpoints a few years ago.

So I’m going to restrain myself and not pound my fist too hard on the desk as I talk about the newly enhanced Statehouse security rules. But those rules are worthy of a decent dose of outrage, as they seem to have been developed without much public discussion, without much concern for openness, and at a time that is certain to — coincidentally or not — frustrate labor union activists who are preparing to launch hallway rallies over anti-union legislation.

Let’s make one thing clear: your view on the security issue should not be based on whether or not you support unions. While the unions are gearing up for a round of protests when the legislative session kicks off this week, this new policy will affect Hoosiers of all political ideologies, and perhaps many who just want to visit a spectacularly beautiful and historic building. Most important, it would send a clearly un-democratic message in the state’s epicenter of democracy.

The part of the rule that has received the most attention limits the number of people in the Statehouse at any time to 3,000. After accounting for government workers, reporters and lobbyists, whose presence is essentially guaranteed, that means somewhere south of 1,500 visitors can be in the sprawling Statehouse at any one time. During days of heated legislative debates, that’s far too few.

And in another swipe at convenience, the Daniels administration announced last week that visitors will have to enter and be screened at one Statehouse entrance, a move likely to cause long lines on the winter days when the legislature is in session. This unfriendly, old-school government rule runs counter to the customer-friendly message long espoused by the administration.

Senate Democratic leader Vi Simpson called the moves “symbolic of a closed, elitist government which seeks to silence the voices of persons who disagree with them.”

I can’t prove such motive, and I hope that’s not what this is. But the timing sends a bad message, coming on the eve of a major battle over changes in union rules that the administration supports. Going forward, rallies over everything from home-schooling to abortion to taxes also could be affected.

Security makes sense. But aspects of this policy do not. For instance, I was struck by a provision limiting the size of signs, often carried into the building by protesters. Such signs can be no larger than two-feet by two-feet. Is there really a safety concern so dire that citizens cannot be allowed to express themselves with larger signs criticizing lawmakers, legislation or their government in general?

In the end, here’s my biggest problem with the new security rules: they have been arrogantly tossed down by state officials without fully considering the impact on ordinary Hoosiers. Those crafting the policy should have had as their goal passing rules that, while providing safety, seek to ensure as much public openness as possible. Every new restriction should be a last resort.

When lawmakers gathered in November, House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, celebrated the many “historic transparencies” the House has adopted in recent years, such as making sure all House proceedings are available on the Internet. Those changes have been wonderful, and Bosma, who has long championed them, should be at the front of the line of critics of this new policy. He might consult with Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, who has questioned the constitutionality of the new policies.

Of course, this doesn’t mean protesters should be allowed to disrupt the work of government, or that crowd control efforts are inherently bad, or that an occupancy limit of some kind isn’t necessary. It simply means people deserve the chance to be heard by their lawmakers, even if that is sometimes uncomfortable.

Since learning of the new policy, I’ve had this vision: On a cold winter morning sometime this month, four Indiana residents get in their respective cars and head for Indianapolis: A home-school advocate from Marion, a union worker from Evansville, a small-businesswoman from Madison and a tea-party activist from Valparaiso. As Hoosiers before them have for generations, all four want to go to the Statehouse to express their views — whether those views are conservative, liberal, moderate or nonpartisan.

But when they arrive at the steps of the state’s most majestic building, the doors are closed. Others who got up earlier, or who had fewer miles to travel, or who were part of a better organized group, have already filled the People’s Building.

And with that, as one critic said last week, the Statehouse will be the People’s Building no longer.

Reach Matthew Tully at (317) 444-6033 or via email at matthew.tully@indystar.com.

Page

Some deadlines have already passed. The internal deadline for most House members to request bill drafts from Legislative Services Agency was in mid-December 2011. Also Friday, January 27th will be the deadline for Committee Reports to be filed in the Indiana House. Therefore, bills introduced in the House will likely need to receive a committee hearing no later than Thursday, January 26th. That gives just three weeks for committee hearings.

Rep. David Yarde II (R-Garrett) is expected to file a bill addressing expansion of the state property tax exemption for solar pv. WATCH THIS BLOG FOR DETAILS! If you are interested please send an email to: IndianaDG.org@gmail.com.

Get involved! Check with your local Chamber of Commerce, newspaper or public library to find out when Third House or Legislative Town Hall meetings will be held in your community. This is one of the best ways to meet and to talk to your state legislators without coming to the State House.

Laura Ann Arnold

LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR FOR 2012 SESSION 

- – -

This story from the New York Times is a follow-up to two earlier blog posts. See U.S. Solar Manufacturers Welcome Support of United Steelworkers in Landmark Trade Case  and Coalition For Affordable Solar Energy Expresses Opposition To China Trade Complaint.

The topic of the future of renewable energy manufacturing such as solar and wind energy system components, aka “supply chain”, was discussed at the Indiana Renewable Energy Association (InREA) Annual Meeting and Conference on Sat., Nov 12, 2011 in Indianapolis.

Laura Ann Arnold

Original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/22/business/global/china-bends-to-us-complaint-on-solar-panels-but-also-plans-retaliation.html

By KEITH BRADSHER

Published: November 21, 2011

HONG KONG — Chinese solar panel makers plan to shift some of their production to South Korea, Taiwan and the United States in hopes of defusing a trade case pending against them in Washington, according to industry executives.

But at the same time, the Chinese industry is considering retaliating by filing a trade case of its own with China’s Commerce Ministry.

The most likely target would be American exports to China of polysilicon — a prime ingredient in solar panels — Chinese industry executives and officials said on Monday. American manufacturers exported about $873 million of polysilicon to China last year, nearly as much in dollar terms as the value of the solar panels that China shipped to the United States.

The Chinese moves come after the United States Commerce Department opened a trade case against China’s solar panel makers earlier this month, at the request of SolarWorld Industries America and six other American solar companies.

The Commerce Department said it was considering punitive tariffs of 50 to 250 percent on Chinese solar panels, based on preliminary evidence that China was “dumping” solar panels in the United States below the cost of making and marketing them. The department is also investigating whether the Chinese government is breaking international trade rules by subsidizing the export of solar panels — if such a finding was made, it could result in additional tariffs.

Having hired trade lawyers to advise them on the Commerce Department case, Chinese solar panel manufacturers are increasingly gloomy about their chances of winning it, said Ocean Yuan, the president of Grape Solar, a big importer of Chinese solar panels that is based in Eugene, Ore.

Mr. Yuan said that Grape Solar was already negotiating with several Chinese manufacturers, whom he declined to identify, to perform final assembly of solar modules in Oregon. That would be the last step in new supply chains the Chinese industry intends to set up that would start in China then run through South Korea and Taiwan in hopes of avoid any new tariffs.

But because final assembly of solar panels is relatively low-tech manual labor, any Chinese expansion into Oregon would be unlikely to add many valuable American jobs.

Currently, the only Chinese solar panel assembly site in the United States is near Phoenix and owned by Suntech Power. That plant has a capacity equal to about 3 percent of the American market for solar panels.

Even before the filing of the trade case, Suntech had begun preparations to increase output at that operation, planning to add a work shift and double the size of the factory. But that will expand the current work force to 260, from 110 now. And even then, its capacity would serve only a small fraction of the American market. By contrast, companies based in China supplied more than 40 percent of the American market for installed panels in the third quarter of this year, according to GTM Research, a renewable energy consulting firm based in Boston.

Meanwhile, the Chinese solar panel industry is seeking legal advice on filing its own antidumping and antisubsidy trade case against the United States, industry executives in Beijing said Monday.

The most likely target would be American exports of polysilicon, the main material used in making conventional solar panels, said Wang Shijiang, a manager at the China Photovoltaic Industry Alliance based in Beijing.

The manufacture of polysilicon requires enormous amounts of energy — so much electricity that it typically takes the first year of operation of the panel to generate as much power as was required to make the polysilicon in it. The process requires superheating large volumes of material in electric-arc furnaces, including the melting of quartzite rock at more than 3,600 degrees Fahrenheit.

The United States is one of the world’s largest producers of polysilicon, in states like Tennessee and Washington, because it has access to a lot of inexpensive hydroelectric power. And most of that polysilicon is exported.

China’s own polysilicon industry is controversial because it relies heavily on electricity generated by coal-fired power plants, and because weak environmental controls at Chinese polysilicon factories have resulted in toxic spills that have fouled streams and rivers.

Solar energy now contributes only about one-tenth of 1 percent of American electricity, but the amount of new solar wattage installed in the United States has been growing more than 70 percent a year since 2008, according to GTM Research.

American solar panel makers, though, have had trouble competing with the Chinese, whose export industry has helped push wholesale solar panel prices down sharply — to $1 to $1.20 a watt of capacity today, from $1.80 in January and $3.30 in 2008.

Three American solar companies that together represented one-sixth of American manufacturing capacity in the sector went bankrupt in August — including Solyndra, whose failure despite receiving more than $500 million in federal loan guarantees has fueled Republican criticism of the Obama administration’s green-energy policy. Four other American solar companies have laid off workers and cut output since spring of last year.

Meanwhile, formerly brisk demand for solar panels in Europe has slowed, as financially pressed governments have reduced subsidies. And so far, the Chinese domestic market for solar power remains tiny. As a result many Chinese manufacturers have a capacity glut, to which they have responded by shipping more panels to the United States, driving prices down.

The United States energy secretary, Steven Chu, noted in Congressional testimony last week that solar panel prices had fallen 70 percent in the last two and a half years. Mr. Chu was testifying as part of a Republican inquiry into Solyndra.

At the simplest level, there are four main steps in making a solar panel, also known as a solar module. Using molten polysilicon to grow crystals or cast blocks of polycrystalline silicon is the first step. The second step is cutting and polishing the material into thin, smooth wafers.

The third step involves chemically treating the wafer and adding electrical contacts to turn it into a solar cell. The last step involves connecting 60 or 72 solar cells together, covering them with glass, enclosing them in an aluminum frame and adding an electrical junction box.

The United States trade case was filed against solar panels for which either of the final two steps — turning the wafer into a cell or assembling cells into a panel — was done in China.

Mr. Yuan said that Chinese manufacturers wanted to keep wafer production in China, but were making plans to ship wafers to Taiwan or South Korea for conversion into solar cells, as one way to potentially avoid any new tariffs the United States Commerce Department might decide to impose. That step is the costliest, most high-tech and most highly automated task in producing solar panels, representing about a third of the total cost.

Chinese manufacturers have studied moving solar cell factories directly to the United States but have largely rejected it in favor of other countries because it takes so long to comply with the many American regulations for opening new factories that use a lot of chemicals, according to a Chinese industry executive, who spoke on condition that neither he nor his employer be identified.

Mr. Yuan of Grape Solar said cells made in Taiwan or South Korea from Chinese wafers would be shipped to the United States for final assembly — a step that typically accounts for a little less than a fifth of the total cost of making a solar panel.

4:13 PM, Nov. 25, 2011

Written by Dan Carpenter

The distinguished columnist George Will, a gushing admirer of our own Gov. Mitch Daniels, recently joined the conservative chorus denouncing the Obama administration’s financial backing of the ill-fated Solyndra green-energy project.

“Crony capitalism,” he called it, noting that it involved a former Obama campaign operative ensconced in the Department of Energy, whose wife is with Solyndra’s law firm.

Progressives like this sort of government meddling in the market, Will sniffed, when in fact it “is not just susceptible to corruption, it is corruption. It is political favoritism with a clean (even green) conscience.”

Indeed. Those lascivious liberals, lavishing taxpayer money on high-risk gambles from which their friends can richly gain and cannot lose.

If the man Will wishes had run for president were not responsible for it, he might have included among his exhibits Indiana Gasification LLC.

I’m not the first to dub this venture Daniels’ Solyndra, and I’m certainly not smart enough to predict disaster for it. But examine the markings.

At Daniels’ behest, and with the blessing of the credibility-challenged Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, the state has promised to shell out $7 billion over 30 years to buy the output of a yet-to-be-built $2.65 billion plant that would make synthetic gas out of coal. The hope is that coal prices fall in the future and natural gas prices rise, making this greenish fuel a bargain. Meanwhile, “hundreds” of jobs — not thousands, for all those billions — will result, Daniels proclaims.

The state is wagering on this little-tested technology because private money — utilities and banks — ran the other way.

The New York company the state is bankrolling has, as its chief Indiana executive, Mark Lubbers, the governor’s former chief of staff and longtime political teammate.

Whether these men have been scrupulous stewards of the public purse will not be known for sure in my lifetime; but I can guarantee they’re not libertarians.

Billions to Lubbers’ Leucadia Corp., billions to the horrendously destructive make-work extension of I-69, billions that would have been foisted on Duke Energy ratepayers if consumer activists and the news media had not exposed that company’s orgy of crony capitalism with the IURC — talk about your big government bedfellowship.

Before he wrote a book condemning President Barack Obama’s Washington for sending our grandchildren down a red river to socialism, Daniels was busy writing the book on grand gestures with the people’s money. To be sure, he has a lot of co-authors, in both political parties; not the least of them the Obama folks, whose stimulus funds have enabled Indiana to skate through the post-meltdown years with its fiscal responsibility image intact and George Will-praiseworthy.

Like Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Daniels will defend the state’s friends as honorable experts and the state’s gambles as necessities of the market. Unlike some pundits, I won’t play favorites with the label “crony capitalism.” Since I’m not going to be at the table, I just hope they get some lucky rolls with my chips.

Carpenter is Star op-ed columnist. Contact him at (317) 444-6172 or at dan.carpenter@indystar.com.