by skeptic06, Tue Jun 12, 2007 at 08:45:54 AM EDT
Where I come in with this is - thinking of that monument to human greed, shortsightedness and (most of all) apathy, the slogan comes to me: Kill Energy Bill.
It underwhelms, even if you figure that I'm talking about a metaphorical guy called Energy Bill who embodies the qualities of the bill itself, or its lobbyists.
But - a cartoon of a character showing that guy - a great fat oilman, say, porcine features, drenched in sweat from the effort of consuming so many of Columbia's resources - with a Una Thurman lookalike with a samurai sword about to slice him in half: that image might stand a chance of lasting. (Or something that did the same thing but was actually, y'know, good...)
by skeptic06, Tue Jun 12, 2007 at 03:28:09 AM EDT
There was a very good reason (or two) for that House ethics truce! As the Lioness is finding out.
A CQpiece yesterday says her plan (devised by the Capuano task force) for a watered down Office of Public Integrity (as compared with the Lieberman version, that is - Obama had something similar, I think) is meeting organized resistance:
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat from California, plans to meet with her caucus Tuesday to help assuage the fears of a sizable group of Democrats who believe that allowing non-members to file complaints will open a floodgate of politically motivated attacks.
by skeptic06, Mon Jun 11, 2007 at 03:25:19 PM EDT
According to Mr Gallup, you call them nearly half of the Democratic Party.
The headline focuses on the GOP's fairy-tale addicts - 68% say they don't believe in evolution. But then, as they say on Wall Street, that particular strain of lunacy has been discounted in the price. (He is Catholic - what can I say?)
Whereas, the Dems are supposed to be the reality-based party, with their feet on the ground, paying no heed to the ju-ju man or any other purveyor of mumbo-jumbo.
by skeptic06, Mon Jun 11, 2007 at 08:03:40 AM EDT
A CQ piece this morning explains the MO:
Reid, D-Nev., is expected to kick things off Monday with a cloture vote that would bring a House-passed energy bill (HR 6) to the floor. Reid will then offer the Senate bill, with a few largely technical modifications, as a substitute amendment. Action on amendments could begin as early as Tuesday.
Wicker said the procedural move is necessary to accommodate the inclusion of an energy tax package that is expected to be marked up in the Senate Finance Committee next week, since all tax bills must originate in the House.
The Senate bill is S 1419, an omnibus bill due to encompass five Senate bills (the four I mentioned last Wednesday
plus one more).
Can there be any doubt that Uncle Harry would think it the cat's pajamas if all this passed lickety-split, and Big Energy got its wicked way?
by skeptic06, Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:09:34 AM EDT
Love the title - I'm following up the thread!
I've been out of range of online for the last day and a half, so - fresh bowl...
It's enormously tempting for a geek like me to suppose that the technical side of things to which one has devoted many an hour and fuddled many a brain cell is the the be-all and end-all of acting to influence legislative process.
It's not - and I try to resist the temptation!
by skeptic06, Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 10:03:44 AM EDT
Every megacorp worthy of the name should have its own page in the tax code. It's a time-honored species of corruption.
But - call me naive! - I doubt that many achieve theirs in as sneaky and underhand way as American Airlines and Continental Airlines.
Not that I blame the airlines: what is Uncle Sam after all but a deep pocket to be picked as legally as one's conscience dictates?
Nor do I blame the senators: it's not their fault that they need megabucks to keep their seats.
No - I blame the PR guys who come up with the excuses:
by skeptic06, Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 08:02:45 AM EDT
To judge from the delay in the corporate response, perhaps the CBC needed some persuasion to get their folks in line.
But was there ever any doubt as to the result?
From the CBC site:
Congresswoman Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI), Chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) released the following statement on the indictment of Congressman William Jefferson.
"The charges against Congressman William Jefferson are serious and warrant thorough deliberation. The law of the land entitles every citizen to presumed innocence until the court of law deems otherwise. We trust the merits of the case against Congressman Jefferson will be examined in a court of law and not the chambers of public opinion."
by skeptic06, Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 04:30:00 AM EDT
Just two short years ago, our friends in the GOP masterminded a landmark piece of corporate welfare known to admirers as the No Lobbyist Left Behind Act.
(More prosaically, S 6 (109th).)
Now, it seems, Uncle Harry has decided to vindicate his leadership by producing an even bigger piece of corporate welfare:
by skeptic06, Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 09:36:21 AM EDT
A Kossack picked it up.
House Democrats, in their first draft of new energy legislation, would wipe out California's landmark global warming law -- despite their California speaker's promises that her party would use the state as a model to combat climate change.
The legislation would pre-empt California and 11 other states from implementing laws requiring automakers to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions across their fleets. The bill would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from granting the states waivers to put their climate change rules into effect.
by skeptic06, Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 05:36:23 AM EDT
The farm bill now has a number - HR 2419 - and page on THOMAS.
The text of the bill on THOMAS fails, in one respect, at least, to tie up with the text on the Ag Committee site of the chairman's marks and amendments passed: the infamous §123 of the Livestock Subcommittee's text is missing from the THOMAS bill.
This despite THOMAS acknowledging on the Congressional Actions page that Livestock had reported to the full committee.
No doubt, it'll all come out in the wash.