National Energy Tax Notes
Speaker Pelosi has scheduled a vote on the National Energy Tax for this Friday. The Hill Magazine is reporting that this is one of the riskiest moves of her tenure as Speaker. I’d say that the details of the legislation tell us that this is all about the tax increase because it isn’t about the environment:
Democratic aides said leaders had been building up to this decision as they monitored negotiations between Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-Minn.) over the weekend.
At press time, Waxman and Peterson emerged from a meeting with the Blue Dog Coalition and announced that they reached an agreement. “We have something that I think works for agriculture,” Peterson said.
The crux of the deal is a concession from Waxman to allow the Department of Agriculture, not the Environmental Protection Agency, to develop and monitor offset and land use provisions the legislation creates. Waxman said he would not only retain the votes of the environmentalists, but also gain votes from those who represent the agriculture community.
By giving the Agriculture Department the authority to “develop and monitor offset and land use provisions the legislation creates”, the Democrats are admitting that their primary goal isn’t cleaning up the environment, that it’s really about increasing taxes on people that they don’t agree with.
I’ve said from the outset that the National Energy Tax wasn’t about the environment, something that Bob Weisman verified with this quote:
Despite disagreeing with him “100 percent, politically,” Weisman said he agreed with Horner that the Obama administration’s cap-and-trade program likely won’t do anything to effect climate change. “Like the Kyoto treaty, it won’t bring down global warming,” Weisman said. “You’d need something more like a 40 percent cut in emissions (to do that).”
This won’t play well for Democrats politically. For instance, how do you think Michigan or Ohio voters will respond to rising home heating bills while they’re unemployed and while their states are running deficits that limit how much help they’ll be able to provide for people?
Andy’s right in saying that the media will never be able to accurately call Collin Peterson a moderate again. He struck a deal essentially to stay out of Nancy’s doghouse. Collin Peterson has tried portraying himself as a reasonable moderate. There’s proof in his voting record that he’s nothing more than Pelosi’s lapdog.
Earlier this year, Peterson opposed Pelosi on the stimulus bill, something that said he opposed wasteful spending. Now we’ve got proof that he’s opposed to wasteful spending but that he doesn’t have a problem voting for massive tax increases. If that’s the definition of a moderate Democrat, then I’d rather side with rabid right wing ideologues. At least I’d know that I wouldn’t get killed with tax increases.
Technorati Tags: Energy, Economy, National Energy Tax, Taxes, Tax Increases, Collin Peterson, Speaker Pelosi, Environment
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog