Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Global Warming Bill in Trouble
#1
Quote:Pelosi concedes ‘not enough votes to pass global warming Bill





From CNN political ticker

House Democrats unsure of global warming bill’s passage

WASHINGTON (CNN) – House Democratic leaders are furiously lobbying their members and moderate Republicans to support a landmark energy bill in the face of resistance from some conservative members of their own party, and staunch opposition from the GOP — roadblocks that are making it difficult to find the 218 votes necessary to pass the measure, according to Democratic leadership aides.

A vote on the Clean Energy and Security Act, which would restrict emissions of green house gases and require use of alternative energy in an effort to slow the effects of global warming, is scheduled for Friday.

The legislation’s lead sponsors held a pep rally outside the Capitol on Wednesday to whip up support for the legislation’s passage.

Look at this, and tell me if you can think of any other resaons why it is in trouble.

[Image: 23waxman_span.jpg]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply
#2
Despite 24 hours of sunlight, the Arctic temperature has yet to surpass 0˚C this year thanks to global warming.
Reply
#3
A curious picture. Does Pelosi have a thing for Waxman? Is he actually shorter?

Why are they trying to push it through on Friday? Or are they just willing to let it die, knowing it will fail? Let's hope the reports of lack of support are true.
Jefferson: I place economy among the first and important virtues, and public debt as the greatest of dangers. To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our choice between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they will be happy.
Reply
#4
jt Wrote:Why are they trying to push it through on Friday?

Bill Clinton used to do that. Has something to do with the news cycle. It doesn't get reported as much. Course now with the Jackson death it won't get any attention.
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#5
This is all too timed.......

I think Jackson, in a last bit to reconnect with his "brothers" decided to lay down his life for the cause and allow Obama and his minions to pass laws unoticed by the general population of stupid out there.

A sacrifice we must negate, because Jackson is worthless.
Reply
#6
LOL! It's a conspiracy I tell ya...
As Gary Lloyd said, "When the government’s boot is on your throat, whether it is a left boot or a right boot is of no consequence."
Reply
#7
The test vote today was 217 to 210, I believe. This equates to several non-votes. Pelosi has been wheeling and dealing to get pork votes, exempting some taxes against agriculture, for instance.

The CBO has said it will cost about $170 per family, and the GOP says it is more like $3,000 per family. $170 is too much, especially when it will have zero positive affects and many negatives. The media is deafeningly silent about getting into the background science and historic affects to similar actions already taken in countries like Spain.

I hope the pressure from the grassroots will affect the votes. Time will tell.
Reply
#8
WmLambert Wrote:The test vote today was 217 to 210, I believe. This equates to several non-votes. Pelosi has been wheeling and dealing to get pork votes, exempting some taxes against agriculture, for instance.

She doesn't have to worry about her job,...as a Representative. She is from Kookville, where kooks vote for kooks. However, her leadership position,.....? Stay tuned.

Quote:The CBO has said it will cost about $170 per family, and the GOP says it is more like $3,000 per family. $170 is too much, especially when it will have zero positive affects and many negatives. The media is deafeningly silent about getting into the background science and historic affects to similar actions already taken in countries like Spain.

Typical Fascism: it is State Run and Controlled, just not owned. And they have only themselves to blame for their almost total loss of influence.

Quote:I hope the pressure from the grassroots will affect the votes. Time will tell.

As James Carville stated earlier, if there is a vote on this, the Jackasses could be repeating it's 1994 position, where they too had a popular Bubba in office.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply
#9
It passed 219-212.
Quote:“I look forward to spending the next 100 years trying to fix this legislation,” said California Republican Brian Bilbray.

“This is the biggest job killing bill that’s ever been on the floor of the House of Representatives. Right here, this bill,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner. “And I don’t think that’s what the American people want.”

Donning reading glasses, Boehner then delayed the roll call vote by reading page-by-page through a 300-page managers’ amendment Democrats added at around 3 a.m. on Friday. Boehner seemed to relish the hour-long stunt, picking out the bill’s most obscure language and then pontificating about what it might – or might not – mean. Republicans laughed along with him and roared with applause when he was done.

The complex bill mandates a 17-percent cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and a 83-percent cut by 2050, reductions that will be accomplished by putting a price on carbon dioxide through a cap-and-trade system. It mandates that 20 percent of electricity comes from renewable sources and increased energy efficiency by 2020. And the legislation gives electric utilities, coal plants, energy-intensive manufacturers, farmers, petroleum refiners, and other industries special protections to help them transition to new, less-fossil fuel-intensive ways of doing business.
Reply
#10
Sweet. I am so glad our adminstration and congress are taking us on a goddamn suicide race. It's happening pretty fast too.

I dunno if I want to watch the news anymore, since it only gets worse. How much longer before Russia or China really become resurgent again?
Reply
#11
"Change we can believe in"


Well, it is possible that there will be more rational people in the Senate.


C'mon, it's possible.

Ok, then - doubtful.

S7
I know you think you understand what you thought I said,
but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant!
Reply
#12
More hidden stuff just keeps coming out of this HUGE rewritten Cap and Tax Bill. Jamie Dupree lists some of the perks, and how it will affect Joe SixPack.

Cap And Trade Extras
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply
#13
WAXMAN-MARKEY BILL WOULD RAISE ELECTRICITY PRICES $846 BILLION

The Waxman-Markey bill to restrict carbon dioxide emissions would cost $846 billion in the next decade alone, in the form of required payments for emissions allowances, according to a June 5 report from the Congressional Budget Office. The bill has been approved by the U.S. House of Representatives and is pending action in the Senate. The CBO findings support statements, by both critics and supporters of the bill, noting consumers will pay higher energy prices if carbon dioxide restrictions are imposed on the American public.

According to Drew Thornley, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis:

1. Government likes cap-and-trade because it is a hidden, or indirect, tax for which industry, rather than Congress or the president, will get the blame when energy prices rise.

2. The public gets smacked twice -- once by higher food and fuel prices and a second time by having to pay for those unemployed by the bill.

3. In addition, the increased unemployment benefits will require cuts to other programs, higher taxes, or bigger deficits.

Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the congressional Western Caucus, says Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is not truly concerned about the effects of the bill on energy prices or jobs.


Quote:"Right now, many Americans are making the responsible decision to cut back on expenses and tighten their belts in order to weather these challenging economic times," Bishop said. "Yet Democrats in Congress refuse to adopt that same type of fiscal restraint. Instead, they remain more steadfast than ever in their commitment to excessive spending habits -- habits bankrolled by the hardworking American taxpayer."

"Cap-and-trade captures the very essence of the Democrat tax-and-spend model that continues to wage war on the American pocketbook," Bishop added. "This national energy tax will discourage job creation, drive up energy costs, derail energy independence, and diminish domestic supply. And yet, there is no sound scientific evidence that proves these policies will bring about effective and measurable change other than job loss and increased costs."
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply
#14
John L Wrote:WAXMAN-MARKEY BILL WOULD RAISE ELECTRICITY PRICES $846 BILLION

The Waxman-Markey bill to restrict carbon dioxide emissions would cost $846 billion in the next decade alone, in the form of required payments for emissions allowances, according to a June 5 report from the Congressional Budget Office. The bill has been approved by the U.S. House of Representatives and is pending action in the Senate. The CBO findings support statements, by both critics and supporters of the bill, noting consumers will pay higher energy prices if carbon dioxide restrictions are imposed on the American public.

According to Drew Thornley, an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis:

1. Government likes cap-and-trade because it is a hidden, or indirect, tax for which industry, rather than Congress or the president, will get the blame when energy prices rise.

2. The public gets smacked twice -- once by higher food and fuel prices and a second time by having to pay for those unemployed by the bill.

3. In addition, the increased unemployment benefits will require cuts to other programs, higher taxes, or bigger deficits.

Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the congressional Western Caucus, says Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is not truly concerned about the effects of the bill on energy prices or jobs.


Quote:"Right now, many Americans are making the responsible decision to cut back on expenses and tighten their belts in order to weather these challenging economic times," Bishop said. "Yet Democrats in Congress refuse to adopt that same type of fiscal restraint. Instead, they remain more steadfast than ever in their commitment to excessive spending habits -- habits bankrolled by the hardworking American taxpayer."

"Cap-and-trade captures the very essence of the Democrat tax-and-spend model that continues to wage war on the American pocketbook," Bishop added. "This national energy tax will discourage job creation, drive up energy costs, derail energy independence, and diminish domestic supply. And yet, there is no sound scientific evidence that proves these policies will bring about effective and measurable change other than job loss and increased costs."

Even more B.S. from John....

Electricity prices will not go up by 846 billion. This is a lie. This is how much money will be raised by the cap and trade legislation. And most of this money will be put right back into the economy in the form of rewards, incentives and subsidies. And yes... some sectors of the economy will lose jobs but others will gain jobs as well.

Here is the CBO report and what they are really saying.
The rightist motto: "Facts?... we don't need no stinkin facts."

[Image: Obama08_Logo150.gif]
Reply
#15
Sorry, but cap and trade will have a negative impact on the economy. It will not raise revenue.
Reply
#16
Not according to the CBO. They say that it will raise revenue. But I'm sure you didn't even bother to read the actual report did you? And You can't prove that it will hurt the economy any more than I can prove it will help. Not than I think I know what it will do to the economy. It may or may not help but at least we will be doing something to start really cutting the amount of pollution that we are emitting.
The rightist motto: "Facts?... we don't need no stinkin facts."

[Image: Obama08_Logo150.gif]
Reply
#17
John L Wrote:[Image: 23waxman_span.jpg]
The guy with a trunk for a nose is Waxman, a Republican and Bush critic. Features prominently in the docu in my thread about Bush's corrupt administration.
"You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." Dick Cheney
Reply
#18
Buzz Wrote:Not according to the CBO. They say that it will raise revenue. But I'm sure you didn't even bother to read the actual report did you? And You can't prove that it will hurt the economy any more than I can prove it will help. Not than I think I know what it will do to the economy. It may or may not help but at least we will be doing something to start really cutting the amount of pollution that we are emitting.

Well I can tell it will hurt and it will be the basis (if passed) for the next major economic calamity. Investment banks and hedge funds have investment structure plans in place to immediately invest in cap and trade.

Cap and trade is nothing more than government imposed derivatives trading in a new artificial fiat currency.
"And down through the centuries the robes have never failed to keep the public at a respectful distance, inspire a decent awe for the professions, and impart an air of solemnity and mystery that has been as good as money in the bank. The four faculties of theology, philosophy, medicine, and law have been the perennial seedbeds, not only of professional wisdom, but of the quackery and venality so generously exposed to public view by Plato, Rabelais, Molière, Swift, Gibbon, A. E. Housman, H. L. Mencken, and others. What took place in the Greco-Roman as in the Christian world was that fatal shift from leadership to management that marks the decline and fall of civilizations." - taken from a speech by Hugh Nibley
Reply
#19
quadrat Wrote:The guy with a trunk for a nose is Waxman, a Republican and Bush critic.

Sure "Q", and cows & pigs can fly, just by flapping their ears. :lol: :lol:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply
#20
TheMan Wrote:
Buzz Wrote:Not according to the CBO. They say that it will raise revenue. But I'm sure you didn't even bother to read the actual report did you? And You can't prove that it will hurt the economy any more than I can prove it will help. Not than I think I know what it will do to the economy. It may or may not help but at least we will be doing something to start really cutting the amount of pollution that we are emitting.

Well I can tell it will hurt and it will be the basis (if passed) for the next major economic calamity. Investment banks and hedge funds have investment structure plans in place to immediately invest in cap and trade.

Cap and trade is nothing more than government imposed derivatives trading in a new artificial fiat currency.

The Jackass party has plenty of "Butt Boys" to carry their water for them. Oh, excuse me, I meant "Buzz Boys". Wink1
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Giving Global Warming The Cold Shoulder John L 7 2,006 10-11-2010, 09:57 AM
Last Post: JohnWho
  "global warming" and "climate change": f jt 2 1,288 05-03-2009, 11:09 PM
Last Post: scpg02
  GOP platform may have global warming plank scpg02 15 3,099 09-02-2008, 03:39 PM
Last Post: scpg02
  Not Evil, Just Wrong: Next Shot In The Global Warming War John L 4 1,839 07-11-2008, 10:12 AM
Last Post: John L
  Weather Channel Founder's Take on Global Warming Scam John L 24 5,279 06-17-2008, 10:17 PM
Last Post: John L
  John McCain outlines a plan to tackle global warming JohnWho 2 1,281 05-13-2008, 04:32 PM
Last Post: JohnWho
  Why Won't AlGore Debate Global Warming? John L 68 16,156 11-21-2007, 07:16 AM
Last Post: drgonzaga
  Alan Caruba on The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died John L 15 3,010 11-15-2007, 09:26 AM
Last Post: drgonzaga
  Put up or shut up on global warming scpg02 12 2,369 08-14-2007, 10:46 PM
Last Post: Lithium
  Video of a great lecture on global warming Jsharp29 3 1,221 06-08-2006, 02:55 AM
Last Post: Independents4Bush

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)