Showing posts with label CONGRESS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CONGRESS. Show all posts

Sunday, July 20, 2008

LIBERALS AND THE OIL-GAS CRUNCH


TO: President George W. Bush
The Leadership of the United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives: The Hon. Mitch McConnell, The Hon. Jon L. Kyl, The Hon. John Cornyn, The Hon. John Ensign, The Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison, The Hon. John R. Thune, The Hon. Richard Burr, The Hon. Norm Coleman, The Hon. Larry E. Craig, The Hon. James M. Inhofe, The Hon. Olympia J. Snowe, The Hon. John E. Sununu, The Hon. David Vitter, The Hon. Jim DeMint, The Hon. John A. Boehner, The Hon. Roy Blunt, The Hon. Eric I. Cantor, The Hon. Adam Putnam, The Hon. Kay Granger, The Hon. John R. Carter, The Hon. Thaddeus G. McCotter, The Hon. Tom Cole, The Hon. Robert C. Byrd, The Hon. Harry Reid, The Hon. Richard J. Durbin, The Hon. Charles E. Schumer, The Hon. Patty Murray, The Hon. Charles E. Schumer, The Hon. Byron L. Dorgan, The Hon. Debbie A. Stabenow, The Hon. Jeff Bingaman, The Hon. Hillary Rodham Clinton, The Hon. Blanche L. Lincoln, The Hon. Barbara Boxer, The Hon. Thomas R. Carper, The Hon. Bill Nelson, The Hon. Russ Feingold, The Hon. Nancy Pelosi, The Hon. Steny H. Hoyer, The Hon. James Clyburn, The Hon. John Lewis, The Hon. Rahm Emanuel, The Hon. John B. Larson, The Hon. Xavier Becerra, The Hon. Rosa DeLauro, The Hon. George Miller, The Hon. Chris Van Hollen, The Hon. Joseph Crowley, The Hon. Diana L. DeGette, The Hon. Ed Pastor, The Hon. Janice D. Schakowsky, The Hon. John S. Tanner, The Hon. Maxine Waters, The Hon. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, The Hon. G.K. Butterfield


President Bush announced on Monday that he would lift a long-standing executive order banning offshore oil drilling and he essentially dared Congress to do the same!

A Little Recent History Is In Order...
Here's what our liberal legislators have done over the past several weeks.
First, liberals attempted unsuccessfully to pass the so-called Boxer Climate Bill.
But it wasn't a "Climate Bill" at all. In actuality, it was really just a huge liberal plot to increase taxes. Here's how Sen. Mitch McConnell described it:
"It is, at its heart, a stealth and giant tax on virtually every aspect of industrial and consumer life. It would result in massive job losses. And it seeks to radically alter consumer behavior, without any measurable benefit to the environment in return."

"And that's why it's so hard to comprehend the Majority's decision to move to a bill, at the start of the summer driving season, that would raise the price of gas by as much as $1.40 a gallon, home electricity bills by about 44 percent, and natural gas prices by about 20 percent."

"Overall, it's expected to result in GDP losses totaling as much as $2.9 trillion by 2050."
Yup, leave it to Barbara Boxer and other liberals in Congress to increase taxes when the price of gasoline at the pump is almost beyond the ability of most Americans to afford it!

But fortunately, because patriotic Americans like you made your voices heard, that bill died an unceremonious death!
But then -- without missing a beat -- several days later, Senate liberals tried to slip through ANOTHER TAX BILL-- masquerading as energy policy.
What were they thinking: Did they wink and chuckle at each other and say:
"Now that the Boxer Bill has failed, they won't be expecting another attempt so soon?"
Fortunately, that measure failed as well!

Meanwhile... In the House of Representatives...
On the House side, Congressman John Peterson introduced an amendment that would have extended the limits of offshore drilling.

Surely, Peterson thought, liberals had gotten the message. The crisis facing our nation was too grave, too painful for "politics as usual." This time he was certain his amendment would pass. It didn't. After the defeat of his amendment, Peterson said: "I was stunned today. I didn't expect this to happen. A lot of Democrats who supported us voted against the amendment. All six Republicans voted 'aye' and all nine Democrats voted 'nay.' I think 'Pelosi Power' was lurking. They were strong-armed from above." These days, Pelosi Power rules Capitol Hill. San Francisco values are the values of today. It's DOWN with people and UP with the snail darter, the Wyoming toad, and the Colorado squawfish.

Left-wing fanatics and environmental whackos are thumbing their noses at their fellow citizens -- a growing number of whom can barely afford to drive to work.
And, as analyst Stephen Schork recently predicted,
"If you think your gasoline bills are expensive now, wait till you get your home heating bill this winter."
As a consequence of Pelosi-Reid-inspired policies, the time has come to put middle-and lower-income Americans on the Endangered Species list.

But Here's The Icing On The Cake...
Senator Obama and a gaggle of liberal legislators started stumping for a windfall tax on oil... a strategy guaranteed to do only one thing... raise the price of gasoline.
A generation ago, the Carter Administration imposed just such a tax and the results were disastrous: a reduced incentive to drill for oil, a drop in domestic production, severe shortages, and long lines at the pump.

Obama was a teenager at the time, but you'd think he'd remember.
These actions raise a chilling question: "Are liberals actually TRYING to drive up gas prices?" For years the Greenies have been down on their knees, begging for higher gasoline prices. In the Energy Bulletin, Hamish McRae published an article with a title that says it all:

"Oil at $100 a barrel will do more to save the planet than all the wind farms in the world."
With the price of oil hovering around $140 per barrel, is the earth safe yet?

Conservative columnist Ann Coulter wrote:
"Democrats couldn't care less about high gas prices. The consistent policy of the Democratic Party, going back at least to Jimmy Carter, has been to jack up gas prices so we can all start pedaling around on tricycles."

"Environmentalists are constantly clamoring for higher gas taxes as the cure-all to their insane global warming theory. Clinton proposed a 26-cent tax on gas. John Kerry said it should be 50 cents. Gore endorsed the Malthusian proposal of Paul and Anne Ehrlich in 'The Population Explosion' that gas taxes be raised gradually to match prices in Europe and Japan."

"Democrats have worked hard to ensure that Americans pay as much for gas as Europeans do. After a quarter-century of gas tax hikes, a ban on drilling for oil and a complete destruction of the nuclear power industry in America, I guess liberals can declare: Mission accomplished! "

"In response to skyrocketing gas prices, liberals say, practically in unison, 'We can't drill our way out of this crisis.'

"What does that mean? This is like telling a starving man, 'You can't eat your way out of being hungry!' 'You can't water your way out of drought!' 'You can't sleep your way out of tiredness!' 'You can't drink yourself out of dehydration!'

"Seriously, what does it mean? Finding more oil isn't going to increase the supply of oil?

"It is the typical Democratic strategy to babble meaningless slogans, as if they have a plan."
In other words, the higher the price at the pump. the fewer the drivers on the road.

Of course, those who can no longer afford gasoline will inevitably be the poor.
But, as Al Gore would say, "Let them ride buses."

Yours in Freedom,

Jeff Mazzella
President
www.cfif.orgCenter for Individual Freedom
113 S. Columbus Street, Suite 310
Alexandria VA 22314
703-535-5836
Fax:703-535-5838
CFIF is a 501(c)(4) not-for-profit constitutional advocacy organization with
the mission to protect and defend individual freedoms and individual rights
in the legal, legislative and educational arenas. Contributions to CFIF are
not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.
Contributions may be deductible as a business expense.

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

SCREW PELOSI AND HER COHORTS

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/04/absolut-arrogance-and-the-advertising-agency-behind-the-reconquista-ad
Better SAVE Than Sorry
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, April 09, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Immigration: Why would nearly 50 Democrats not allow legislation they co-sponsored to get to the House floor for a vote? Because their boss, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, doesn't want meaningful immigration reform that protects our borders.
________________________________________
Read More: Immigration
________________________________________
It's a tad unnatural for House Republicans to be pushing a so-called discharge petition to force a vote on a piece of Democratic legislation. But such is the case with the Secure America with Verification and Enforcement Act, or SAVE, authored by freshman Democratic Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina.
Among the bill's key provisions are the addition of 8,000 border patrol agents the next four years and 1,200 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to strengthen interior enforcement and support local law enforcement officers.
Another provision ensures that agents have "high-quality body armor that is appropriate for the climate and risks faced by the agent."
The SAVE Act also provides for the acquirement along the border of advanced technologies, including aerial surveillance systems and infrared technology. It would add 13 more federal judges to hear cases against those who are arrested for breaking into the U.S., including drug traffickers and the wily coyotes paid to transport illegal aliens into this country.
While adding sticks, the act cuts down the number of carrots attracting illegal aliens — illegal employment — by expanding the E-verify program to provide employers with the tools to confirm that prospective employees are legally here. E-verify is a Web-based system to cross-reference Social Security numbers and other pertinent information. Some 56,000 employers already use the system.
The system screens all applicants, so racial profiling is not an issue. As we've noted, in states where local authorities have ramped up enforcement, illegal immigration has declined dramatically, and many of those already here have left under a process some have called self-deportation. The risks soon exceed the benefits.
While the V stands for verification and the E stands for enforcement, the A does not stand for amnesty. This might explain the opposition of the House Democratic leadership.
It deals strictly with sealing the borders first, creating a safe and secure system under which issues such as guest workers and paths to citizenship can be dealt with. The theory is: First, stop the bleeding.
It could be that some of these co-sponsors are not serious, that they want to go before the voters saying they're in favor of protecting our borders knowing the legislation might never see the light of day. Then they can say it's not their fault it's bottled up in committee. Few voters know or care that a discharge petition is a procedure that moves a bill out of committee
The bill has 147 co-sponsors from more than half the states, including 49 Democrats, but Speaker Pelosi is leading the fight to prevent a floor vote. It takes 218 signatures on a discharge petition to force a floor vote, and so far 185 have signed the one on SAVE. Interestingly, only 10 of the original Democratic co-sponsors have done so.
An outraged Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner said in support of the discharge petition:
"In just the past year, this (Democratic) majority voted to cut funding for the border fence, opened the door to illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded services without showing proof of citizenship and overturned a successful GOP proposal to prevent taxpayer-funded federal benefits from being awarded to illegal immigrants."
If 33 of the original Democratic co-sponsors of the SAVE Act who have not signed the discharge petition were to do so, the bill would proceed to the floor where serious debate on a major issue could begin. But that would require Democrats' going on record in an election year and doing more than blowing smoke on border security.
/