California Conservative

I just got an email from Gabriela at the Sunlight Foundation. She’s proud to announce that, thanks to the Sunlight Foundation’s supporters, congresscritters are now free to use blogs, Twitter and YouTube. Here’s the text of the email:

Dear Sunlighters,

Good news! Thanks to your help, the House and Senate recently updated the guidelines that govern how members of Congress can use the Internet to communicate with us about their work.

The new rules now allow members of Congress to interact with us on sites such as Twitter, YouTube and Flickr. Sunlight advocated for these rules changes through our bipartisan collaborative effort; the Open House Project, http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/, and through our popular Let Our Congress Tweet campaign, the first Twitter-based petition to Congress. Thanks to the hundreds of you who joined our call for change!

To show our gratitude, we’ve created Capitol Tweets at http://sunlightfoundation.com/CAPITOLTWEETS/. This widget, which you can embed on your site, lets you follow the latest tweets from members of Congress who use Twitter.

Get the code to embed the Capitol Tweets widget here:

http://sunlightfoundation.com/capitoltweets/

While you’re at it, be sure to check out PC Magazine’s list of the “5 sites That Will Boost your Political Knowledge”

http://tinyurl.com/pcworld5sites

You might recognize a few Sunlight friends such OpenSecrets.org, OpenCongress.org and FedSpending.org, who do great work to bring more transparency to work of our federal government.

Thanks again for your support,

Gabriela Schneider & the Sunlight team

Anytime that We The People win another battle for disinfectant of transparency is a good day. Our work must continue, though, because politicians, by nature, are resistant to transparency. This victory is sweet but the fight continues.

Congratulations to the vigilant efforts of the Sunlight Foundation.

Technorati Tags: Blogging, Twitter, YouTube, Sunlight Foundation, Flickr, Transparency

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

Robert Novak has posted something at Townhall.com about Sen. Obama mocking Sen. Obama’s definition of a tax loophole. Here’s what Mr. Novak posted:

How would Barack Obama pay for the $800 billion that John McCain claimed in the first presidential debate Sept. 26 in Oxford, Miss., that his Democratic opponent would spend if he were elected president? Obama replied, by “closing tax loopholes.”

Obama was no more specific in the debate, and tax experts doubt that structural changes without increasing taxes can raise anything close to that amount of money.

My office asked the Obama campaign for the details, and it responded with a 19-page single-spaced paper on the candidate’s “tax plans.”

In fact, there was precious little about tax policy in the paper, which amounted to a repeat of Democratic campaign oratory that can be heard in 30-second speeches before both houses of Congress daily on C-SPAN. (more…)

John Boehner’s office has issued this statement on the Democrats throwing in the towel on drilling. Leader Boehner sounds the same caution I sounded earlier. Here’s the money quote from Leader Boehner’s statement:

Lifting these outdated bans is a long-overdue but crucial step toward American energy independence. But it is just that: a step. Congress still has a great deal of work left to do before the ‘all of the above’ energy plan proposed by House Republicans becomes a reality. Two months ago, we introduced the American Energy Act to increase environmentally-safe drilling that gives states a stake in energy production occurring off their shores and on their lands, encourage more conservation and efficiency, and promote the use of renewable and alternative fuels.

Giving states a financial incentive would be the last domino that’s needed to fall to achieve final victory for the American people. States would get healthy in a hurry if they got annual checks in the hundreds of millions of dollars. (more…)

At midnight of October 1, the ban on oil exploration and production could come to an end. It would also mean that the federal government would shut down temporarily. In the meantime, Speaker Pelosi is trying to pass a continuing resolution that includes an extension of the various moratoria. Here’s the statement from the Institute for Energy Research:

Having failed to pass the required measures to fund the government for the next fiscal year, Congress must now pass what is known as a Continuing Resolution (CR) in order to avoid a government shutdown. A draft of the resolution contains a provision taken from the recently passed House bill, H.R. 6899, to continue the ban on energy exploration and production on nearly all of the taxpayer owned Outer Continental Shelf in the lower 48 states for another year. At present, the ban is set to expire at the end of September. Dan Kish, Senior Vice President for Policy at IER issued the following statement:
“In 9 days the long-outdated ban on energy exploration on the energy rich, taxpayer-owned Outer Continental Shelf will come to an end. But like a thief in the night, it appears our government is attempting to sneak a new energy ban into a must-pass spending measure, thus continuing the decades-old, government-imposed American energy embargo.” (more…)

It’s insulting enough when Speaker Pelosi tells the American people that the House passed pro drilling legislation. It only took a visit to the IER website to expose the gimmicks in the bill that look like drilling provisions but aren’t. Now she’s saying that Pelosi’s Democrats “took strong action to curb excessive speculation” in the marketplace. If this exaggerating continues, I expect her to eventually say that she’s able to leap tall buildings in a single bound.

This week, the Democratic-Led Congress has taken serious and comprehensive steps to ensure American energy independence and help consumers with the price at the pump.

Earlier this week, we passed comprehensive energy legislation to put us on the path toward energy independence by expanding domestic supply, protect consumers with strong action to lower the costs of energy and to protect taxpayers by making Big Oil pay for its fair share of our transition to a clean, renewable energy future, ensure a clean, green future through energy efficiency and conservation, and commit America to renewable energy and help create millions of good-paying green jobs.

Today, we have built on that accomplishment with another critical step to protect consumers and lower energy costs. Experts have testified before Congress that excessive speculation in the oil markets may be responsible for inflating oil prices by as much as $20 to $60 more per barrel. With the legislation passed today, we have taken strong action to curb excessive speculation in the energy futures markets, and make the market work for the consumer. (more…)

Whenever I want the clearest picture of the Democrats’ non-energy energy bills, I head straight to the Institute for Energy Research. Wanting to put forward the best explanation on why the bill pushed through by Pelosi’s Democrats, I visited this webpage. I’m glad I found it. Here’s what I found:

The bill permanently bans and development within 50 miles of shore. [Sec. 102]

The vast majority of undiscovered oil and gas reserves are projected to be between the coast and 50 miles offshore.

Here’s another noteworthy point made:

Fails to open new, energy rich areas for exploration and development in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. These areas in the Gulf could start producing oil and gas very quickly because they are close to existing infrastructure.

If the Democrats were serious about providing instant price relief, lifting the ban on drilling here should’ve been their highest priority. This proves that providing quick price relief isn’t the Democrats’ highest priority. That begs this question:

If prices at the pump are crippling families’ budgets and high heating bills only 2 months, if that, off, and with high prices at the pump crippling the economy, shouldn’t providing price relief be the Democratic majority’s top priority? Apparently, this legislation is proof that it’s barely a blip on the Democrats’ radar. (more…)

I’m a proud contributor to the NRCC. I’m a proud contributor to the NRCC because the House Republicans have fought the good fight against the dictatorial anti-drilling rule of Speaker Pelosi. Despite the Democrats’ latest anti-drilling legislation, John Boehner and the House GOP Caucus aren’t leaving the battlefield. Here’s Leader Boehner’s latest press release on the subject:

Prior to today’s debate on the No Child Left Inside Act (H.R. 3036), House Republicans will move to force a debate and vote on legislation to keep the number issue on the minds of the American people, high energy costs, on the radar of this Democratic Congress. The measure, sponsored by House Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (R-MI), would put Democrats on notice that Congress should not adjourn until a real, comprehensive energy reform bill is enacted into law.

Two days ago, the Democratic Majority passed a sham bill they claim would increase American energy production and lower gas prices, but in reality, it was designed to provide political cover for vulnerable Democrats who have promised their constituents they would support pro-energy legislation. An editorial in this morning’s Charleston Daily Mail slammed the bogus “no energy” bill: (more…)

Today, Minority Leader John Boehner’s office issued this scalding statement on the Democrats’ hypocritical energy strategy. The statement highlights Democratic co-sponsors of the Peterson-Abercrombie bill that John Peterson and Neil Abercrombie wrote. Here’s part of Leader Boehner’s statement:

House Democrats say they want to “stimulate” the economy, but last night nearly every single one of them voted against the bipartisan energy bill authored by Reps. John Peterson (R-PA) and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) to lower gas prices on behalf of working families and small businesses, including 24 Democrats who are cosponsors of the Peterson-Abercrombie bill. That’s correct, 24 Democrats flip-flopped, repudiated their past statements of support and cosponsorship for the bipartisan Peterson-Abercrombie bill by voting against it. And by rejecting the Peterson-Abercrombie bipartisan plan, Democrats proved once and for all that yesterday’s debate was about nothing more than providing political cover for vulnerable Democrats on the eve of an election, and not about passing “all of the above” energy reforms to make a real difference in lowering gas prices.

When it was ‘rubber-meets-the-road’ time, this group of Democrats showed where their allegiances lied. Here’s the list of deserting co-sponsors:

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-GA), Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK), Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-KS), Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA), Rep. Bud Cramer (D-AL), Rep. Henry Cueller (D-TX), Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL), Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-TN), Rep. Bart Gordon (D-TN), Rep. Gene Green (D-TX), Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL), Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), Rep. Steve Kagen (D-WI), Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-PA), Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA), Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA), Rep. Solomon Ortiz (D-TX), Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN), Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (D-TX), Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR)

It’s worth noting that many of these deserting co-sponsors are BDD’s. Still, the most stunning part of this is that Neil Abercrombie deserted his own plan. That’s unthinkable. It’s unthinkable because it’s extremely hypocritical. I can’t think of another time when a co-author of a bill abandoned the bill. It’s one thing to abandon it if a bunch of amendments had dramatically changed the bill. Thats defensible. This bill wasn’t dramatically altered. It was barely changed. (more…)

While Nancy Pelosi works frantically to cobble together enough support for their latest version of a non-energy energy bill, Mary Landrieu has already declared the bill DOA in the Senate. This is how Sen. Landrieu specifically delivered that message:

Even if the bill reaches the Senate, he said, the bill is in trouble, given strong opposition by Sen. Mary Landrieu, (D-LA), who calls it “dead on arrival” since it fails to provide revenue sharing between the states and federal government. “The Senate will never pass a bill without revenue sharing, in my view,” she was quoted as saying.

The House bill hinges on that provision. Ms. Pelosi won’t sign off on a bill that gives financial incentives to states to opt in. The minute the bill has financial incentives in it is the minute that states opt in. It’s estimated that Virginia would get an estimated $200 million annually by opting in. The chances that they wouldn’t opt in are minimal at best. Louisiana would likely get a healthy chunk of cash from such a bill, too. There’s no way that Bobby Jindal would bypass that type of cash flow.

Putting out his best spin, Rep. Nick Rahall, (D-WVA), offered this timid defense: (more…)

1:59– I just got connected to the GOP blogger conference call hosted by House Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam. We’re scheduled to start momentarily.
2:05– Adam Putnam is starting to lay out “what might or might not be” in the Democrats’ bill. Reop. Putnam said that the House GOP changed the entire debate.
2:07– “They’re [Democrats] taking a victory lap” but they know that “responsible governors” won’t opt in because there isn’t a financial incentive for them to do so. Rep. Putnam says that they know drilling won’t happen because of that.
2:10– “Ironically, Democrats have submitted a drilling only bill.” Rep. Putnam then adds that “they fund their bill with $85 billion in tax hikes.”
2:12– “Renewable electricity standards will cause price spikes.”
2:13– ” Democrats should hold an open & fair debate.”
2:14– Stan from Conservatives With Attitude asks why Republicans didn’t do more whan thay had the majority. Rep. Putnam is pointing out all that got passed.
2:16– Brian Faughnan from Redstate is worried about Gang of “10 or 16 or 20 or whatever it is.” Rep. Putnam says that that is a concern. Rep. Putnam then says that the House GOP leadership has been in contact with the Senate GOP leadership on this. Most importantly, Rep. Putnam says that the group hasn’t “put legislation forward, just talking points.” Rep. Putnam is skeptical of their ability to put it together with this little time but they’re keeping their eyes open on this.
2:20– I ask about whether the House GOP would offer an amendment that gives Virginia, Louisiana and other states a financial incentive in opting in. Rep. Putnam said that the GOP hasn’t settled on a specific strategy yet but, depending on what’s in the bill, they’d likely take that opportunity. As a followup, I asked “Shouldn’t the benchmark be about what’s done, not what’s talked about?” Rep. Putnam’s response: “That’s a great way to frame it. Yes, that should be what we demand.”

Technorati Tags: Adam Putnam, House GOP, House Oil Party, Drilling, Gang Of 10, Gang Of 16, Environmentalists, Amendments

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog