Reid-Pelosi Dems Dismiss President Obama’s Earmark Ban In Spending Bill
In Addition To Earmarks In House Bill, Senate Bill Includes Millions For Projects From Fish Barriers To ATV Trails To Honey Bee Insurance
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: “We Will Ban All Earmarks In The Recovery Package.” (Barack Obama, Press Conference, 1/6/09)
• $20 million “for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers.” (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “20,000,000 for the removal of small- to medium-sized fish passage barriers)
• $400 million for STD prevention (Pg. 60 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “CDC estimates that a proximately 19 million new STD infections occur annually in the United States …The Committee has included $400,000,000 for testing and prevention of these conditions.”)
• $25 million to rehabilitate off-roading (ATV) trails (Pg. 45 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “$25,000,000 is for recreation maintenance, especially for rehabilitation of off-road vehicle routes, and $20,000,000 is for trail maintenance and restoration”)
• $34 million to remodel the Department of Commerce HQ (Pg. 15 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: $34,000,000 for the Department of Commerce renovation and modernization”)
• $70 million to “Support Supercomputing Activities” for climate research (Pgs. 14-15 of Senate Appropriations Committee Report: $70,000,000 is directed to specifically support supercomputing activities, especially as they relate to climate research)
• $150 million for honey bee insurance (Pg. 102 of Senate Appropriations Committee report: “The Secretary shall use up to $ 50,000,000 per year, and $150,000,000 in the case of 2009, from the Trust Fund to provide emergency relief to eligible producers of livestock, honey bees, and farm-raised fish to aid in the reduction of losses due to disease, adverse weather, or other conditions, such as blizzards and wildfires, as determined by the Secretary”)
###
SENATE REPUBLICAN COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
PermalinkPosted: January 29, 2009 at 10:33:30 AM EST
Bipartisan Rejection Of A Partisan Plan
Every Republican And 11 Democrats In The House Oppose The Reid-Pelosi Partisan Spending Bill
REID-PELOSI PARTISAN APPROACH TO SPENDING BILL:
SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): “Yes, we wrote the bill. Yes, we won the election.” (Rep. Pelosi, Press Conference, 1/22/09)
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: “We cannot -- there are going to be a whole host of good ideas out there, and we welcome all of them. And we're going to sift through all of them, and we are going to work in a collaborative fashion with Congress. … Well, as I said before, Democrats or Republicans, we welcome good ideas.” (Barack Obama, Press Conference, 1/9/09)
TIME: “To underline bipartisanship, the Obama Administration had hoped the stimulus plan would get 80 votes in the Senate, luring significant Republican backing rather than having to ram it through with a simple Democratic majority.” (“Economic Stimulus Plan Hits Bipartisan Obstacles,” Time, 1/22/09)
PermalinkPosted: January 28, 2009 at 7:23:53 PM EST
McConnell On The Stimulus: ‘Hopefully It Will End Up Being More Stimulus And Less Pork’ (Video)
WASHINGTON, DC –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell appeared on CNN news program “American Morning” Wednesday morning. The following are excerpts from the program:
On the Senate Republicans’ Meeting with President Obama:
“… I invited him to come up in December, and he did yesterday. We enjoyed having him. He listened to our suggestions. I think his biggest problem is oddly enough, not with us, but with Congressional Democrats, who seem not to have gotten the memo about the nature of a stimulus, which is that it ought to be timely, temporary, and targeted.”
On the Democrats’ Trillion-Dollar Spending Bill:
“The House package, we haven't seen the Senate package yet, we haven't had the debate on the floor, but the House package has still got things like, you know, repairing ATV trails and fish passages and other things, you know, that may be worthwhile projects but are certainly not going to meet the standard of timely, temporary, and targeted. So, there's widespread agreement that we need a stimulus package. We're still working on it in the Senate. Hopefully it will end up being more stimulus and less pork.”
On Fixing the Housing Problem:
“Well, there are two things that we think are essential. Number one, we need to go right at the housing problem, that's what started all of this. We have a proposal for 4% mortgages that we think would dramatically go right at what started the whole thing.
“…many people would refinance. It would deal with the leveraging problem that the whole country has, too much debt, both the government and individuals. In addition to that, the President himself, of course, also indicates that the housing problem is important. We just approved a second tranche of the troubled asset relief program. He indicated yesterday he thought a substantial portion of that would be devoted to housing. I don't know whether that will happen or not. But it should. But we believe that a part of the stimulus package, this 4% mortgage proposal, would go directly at the housing problem which started the whole mess.”
On Tax Relief for Individuals and Businesses:
“In addition to that, there's no question, that tax relief, both for individual taxpayers, get those middle-class tax rates down so it will be reflected in people's take-home pay immediately and also some business tax relief. I think the president believes there ought to be some business tax relief. We think that's important. And in terms of the tax portion of the overall package, the President had originally said he thought it ought to be 40%. We agree with that.
“Unfortunately, it looks like in the House package it's crammed down to about 20%. And much of that tax relief doesn't go to people who pay income taxes. So, where we had differences with the House democrats is that the package just doesn't seem to reflect our priorities, nor the President's.”
On the Cram-Down Proposal:
“Yeah, what I do oppose is giving judges the ability to change the terms of the contracts, the so-called cram-down proposal. What that would do in effect is raise mortgage rates for everyone in the country who is in compliance. It’s important to remember that over 90% of Americans are making their payments on time. They haven't done anything wrong and they didn't deserve to have their interest rates raised by some unelected judge.”
PermalinkPosted: January 28, 2009 at 1:23:58 PM EST
Meeting Challenges: A Way Forward for Congress
Remarks of U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (as prepared for delivery) National Press Club, January 23, 2009
“Thank you, Donna. I also want to thank John Donnelly of Congressional Quarterly for inviting me here today. I’m delighted to be here, and I’m honored to be joined by such a distinguished group of reporters.
“For more than a century, the National Press Club has served a vital national purpose as a forum for newsmakers and those who cover them. A free press is essential to our Democracy. And today I thought I’d come over here to look for some free press.
“This past Tuesday, millions of Americans who are old enough to remember past inaugurations were reminded of one of the great hallmarks of our republic, and millions of young people experienced for the first time the rejuvenating effect of the peaceful transfer of power. Of all our civic rituals, few elicit the same feelings of national pride at home or more admiration abroad.
“But the inauguration of President Obama was somehow different, and not only because we were moved at seeing an African American take the oath of office from the steps of a building built by slaves. This year’s inauguration was different because this year’s election was different.
“For the first time in awhile, America has a president who isn’t viewed by most people as an overly polarizing figure. Americans are intrigued by President Obama’s promise of post-partisanship. And this afternoon I’d like to share some of my thoughts on the possibility of a new era of cooperation.
“As others have noted, the President does not govern alone. He can’t sign a bill Congress hasn’t already passed. He can’t spend money Congress hasn’t appropriated. If President Obama’s promise of post-partisanship is to be realized, he’ll first need some cooperation from Congress.
“And so, in the spirit of overcoming divisions, let me start out by saying that I agree with President Obama’s assertion on Tuesday that many of today’s problems are simply too great for us to pass over in the interest of protecting narrow interests. The normal constituencies must be widened.
“On issue after issue, members of both parties have too often fallen into the habit of asking narrow interest groups what they think should be done about something before thinking about what the average American thinks should be done.
“This is how a group like CodePink could end up having so much influence in a national debate about the conduct of a war. This is why a prominent labor leader thinks he can tell a reporter that he expects ‘payback’ from Democrats for the support he gave them during last year’s elections. And this is how vulgar insults hurled from overcaffeinated activists can suddenly pass for legitimate political discourse.
“When these things happen, it’s easy to see why cynicism about government persists.
“And it’s easy to see why something needs to change.
“Both sides are guilty. Republicans need to reevaluate the way decisions are made in Washington, and so do Democrats. But one thing is clear: every decision cannot be made based on a political calculation — because the usual interest groups so seldom agree.
“President Obama seems to understand this. His campaign was based on the notion that ordinary Americans would have a seat at the table in his administration. And broadening the old constituencies is, as he has suggested, one sure way to uphold that pledge.
“Once we do this, there are many issues on which we can cooperate. President Obama mentioned several of them on the campaign trail: reducing the national debt, increasing energy independence, and lowering taxes. There are others. But achieving any one of them will be impossible without cooperation between both parties in Congress and between Congress and the White House.
“Now, I realize that if you told most people Mitch McConnell was down at the National Press Club hoping for bipartisanship, they’d tell you that’s like an insurance agent hoping for an earthquake. Most people don’t exactly view me as the Mr. Rogers of the Senate. But, respectfully, I think reporters too often confuse being conservative with being partisan. And while my voting record clearly reflects my core values, it also reflects a long commitment to working with others.
“Senator Feinstein has been my closest collaborator in fighting human rights abuses in Burma. For years, I worked alongside Senator Dodd on the Senate Rules Committee, where we teamed up to pass the Help America Vote Act. And more recently, I took a lead role in brokering a bipartisan financial rescue plan just a few weeks before my own reelection bid in November.
“I fought for the rescue package because I thought the country needed it, even though my party could have done without it — and I ended up paying for my efforts. Soon after the deal was struck, one of the very people who had sat at the negotiating table with me ended up running ads against me on that very issue. He saw that it made me vulnerable back home, and tried to capitalize on it politically, which I certainly didn't expect. But these are the risks that politicians have to take from time to time in order to achieve something worthwhile. And it’s a risk I was willing to take.
“There was, of course, a time when working on a bipartisan basis to achieve big things for the nation didn’t mean exposing oneself to attack ads by one’s own colleagues. For years, the Senate was a place where real friendships across party lines were common. One thinks of the breakfast meetings between Mike Mansfield and George Aiken; or Jim Eastland and Gaylord Nelson — men as far apart ideologically as you could find — spending time together after a long day’s work. My Senate mentor, John Sherman Cooper, had a close relationship with President Kennedy.
“These friendships were always good for the Senate, and occasionally they paid major dividends for the whole country. One of the great examples of this in the modern era is the Social Security fix of 1983, brokered by Pat Moynihan and Bob Dole. And it’s an example we could learn a lot from today.
“As Moynihan later recalled it, the genesis of that particular achievement came on the morning of January 3, 1983. Dole had published an op-ed piece in that day’s edition of the ‘New York Times’ in which he said that Republicans were eager to accomplish big things in the coming year.
“He cited Social Security as a case in point, arguing that the looming insolvency of Social Security should overwhelm every other domestic priority. By accelerating already-scheduled taxes and reducing future benefit increases, Dole said, Social Security could be made solvent for decades.
“At some point later in the day, Moynihan approached Dole on the Senate floor. If Dole really thought Social Security could be saved, he said, why not try to do it together? Well, 13 days later, an agreement was reached, and the Social Security crisis had passed.
“Twenty years later, Bob Dole could say that he had been the longest serving Republican Leader in history and the Republican nominee for president of the United States. But when a reporter asked him what he considered his proudest accomplishments in a lifetime of public service, the first thing that came to mind was the Social Security fix of 1983. Dole explained it this way: ‘Those things that are lasting are bipartisan. If you don’t have a consensus, it’s not going to last.’
“This kind of bipartisan consensus has been increasingly rare in recent years, and the nation has suffered as a result. We saw this four years ago, when President Bush, newly re-elected and with expanded Republican majorities in Congress, had the courage to put Social Security reform on the agenda. When he asked for bipartisan help, not one Democrat in Congress stepped forward. Every single one of them turned his or her back, reflexively choosing politics over governing — and the nation lost out on an opportunity to fix a crucial program in desperate need of reform.
“Today, Democrats have substantial majorities in the Senate and the House. They control the White House. And now Democrats assume responsibility for a number of pressing problems — including the one they refused to face in 2005. The problem with entitlement spending has not gone away.
“On Social Security in particular, the situation is increasingly dire: in 1950, 16 workers paid for every one person who received Social Security benefits. Today, it’s about 3 workers per beneficiary. And within 10 years times, more money will be coming out of the Social Security fund than going in.
“Looking at entitlements in general, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs will soon consume about twice the percentage of the federal budget they did four decades ago. If we don’t rein this spending in, soon we’ll have only have a fraction left for things like defense, roads, bridges, and special ed. And this is not a problem that raising taxes will solve. In order to meet all our current entitlement promises, we’d have to extract $495,000 from every American household.
“The expansion of entitlement spending is a looming crisis that has been overlooked for too long. And with control of the White House and big majorities in Congress, Democrats now owe it to the American people to put their power to work on this vital issue. And here’s my pledge: If they do so, they can expect more cooperation from Republicans than the last President received from them.
“President-elect Obama has said he wants to tackle the entitlements crisis. But in order to succeed, he’ll have to continue to reject the hyper partisanship that exists in some quarters of Congress. And he will have to engage Republicans on the merits of our ideas.
“The good news is that most people think ideas should be assessed on their merits, not on the senator or the president who proposes them. Our new President seems to think the same thing. And as Senate Republican Leader, I also pledge to make this is a firm principle in my dealings with the Obama Administration.
“President Obama’s campaign reminded many in Washington, including many Republicans, of the aspirations that the Americans people have about their government. People want their leaders to work together to solve problems, not to set traps. The challenge now is for both parties to cooperate, not just in word but in deed.
“In all this, politics will have its place. But at this moment, achieving big things for the country is where my ambitions lie. Voters from both parties think Washington is broken. And that’s a shame. But if both parties have helped create this cynical view of government, then both parties will have to work to correct it. And we can start, once the current debate over the Stimulus is through, by working to reform Social Security and Medicare.
“In this and in other efforts, there will be disagreements. But they can be principled disagreements, and the result of principled disagreement is often principled cooperation. The result won’t satisfy everyone. As Bob Dole said of the 1983 Social Security fix, ‘No one got everything, and everyone got something.’
“But many of the domestic problems we face are simply too great to kick the can down the road any longer. We need to summon the courage to act on issues that are of grave concern to our nation’s future. And the long-term sustainability of entitlements is one of them.
“As Republicans look for common ground in this and other areas where legislative progress can be made, some will no doubt accuse us of compromise. But those who do so will be confusing compromise with cooperation. And anyone who belittles cooperation resigns him or herself to a state of permanent legislative gridlock. And that is simply no longer acceptable to the American people.
“President Obama has shown himself to be a man of legislative ambition. He reaffirmed this on Tuesday when he called on the country to recognize collective failures, and when he called on politicians to step up to the unpleasant tasks and seek first the interests of the whole.
“Make no mistake: Some of our new President’s proposals will be met with strong, principled resistance from me and from others. But many of his ambitions show real potential for bipartisan cooperation. And if we see sensible, bipartisan proposals, Republicans will choose bipartisan solutions over partisan failures every time.
“Thank you very much.”
PermalinkPosted: January 23, 2009 at 2:02:40 PM EST
McConnell: ‘Republicans have a better idea to ensure fairness in the workplace’
‘If we are going to grow our economy, we need to focus on legislation which will create jobs – not put undue hardships on job creators’
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks Thursday on the Senate floor regarding the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act:
“We’ve heard a lot of debate over the past few days on fairness. Every member of this body supports equal pay for equal work.
“The Ledbetter bill isn’t about fair pay. Pay discrimination has been illegal since 1963.
“This bill is about effectively eliminating the statute of limitations on pay discrimination.
“It unfairly targets business owners, who in many cases will no longer have the evidence they would need to mount a just defense.
“Job creators have enough to worry about. We shouldn’t add the threat of never-ending lawsuits.
“Republicans have a better idea to ensure fairness in the workplace.
“Sen. Hutchison has crafted a commonsense proposal that says the clock shouldn’t run out on someone who’s been discriminated against until he or she discovers the alleged discrimination. That’s fair to both sides.
“If we are going to grow our economy, we need to focus on legislation which will create jobs – not put undue hardships on job creators.”
PermalinkPosted: January 22, 2009 at 11:00:37 AM EST
The 111th Congress
‘Now is our chance to deliver — not just in word, but in deed’
WASHINGTON, D.C. –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks (as prepared) on the Senate floor Tuesday regarding the opening of the 111th Congress:
“The opening of a new Congress is always an important moment in the life of our nation. Every time the gavel falls on a new legislative term we’re reminded of the grandeur of the document we are sworn to uphold. We are grateful to the citizens of our respective states — in my case, the people of Kentucky — who give us the opportunity to serve. And we are thankful once again that the U.S. Constitution has endured to guarantee the freedom and the prosperity of so many for so long.
“The growth of our nation over the years is one of the most remarkable feats of man. And it was far from inevitable. When Congress first organized under the Constitution, the United States consisted of just 11 states and three million citizens. Today, more people than that live in Kentucky alone. Yet, despite a bloody civil war, the arrival of millions of immigrants, economic collapse, world wars, social unrest, and the long-delayed realization of America’s original promise of equality for all, we have hung together as a body and as a nation. We have not just endured these things. We have flourished. And that is well worth remembering and celebrating as the 111th Congress convenes.
“As we meet here in January of 2009, America faces many serious challenges, and none is more urgent than our troubled economy. President-elect Obama was one of those who recognized the gravity of the current troubles early on. He reassured many by fielding a solid team of economic advisors. He agrees with Republicans that we should put more money in the pockets of middle-class American families by cutting their taxes. And he has proposed working with Republicans to create jobs and to encourage long-term economic stability with a massive domestic spending bill the details of which members of Congress and the American people are increasingly eager to see.
“After a long and rough campaign season, it is encouraging for many Americans to see that the two parties in Washington are in broad agreement about something so important to their daily lives. And Americans can be assured that Republicans will work with President-elect Obama to make sure that as we consider this massive spending bill, the taxpayer isn’t taken for a ride.
“All of us agree that the economy needs help. We’re concerned, and taxpayers are concerned. But if we’re going to appropriate an unprecedented amount of money from the Treasury for this spending bill, it’s absolutely essential that we determine up front whether the spending is going to be wasteful or wise.
“Specifically, the American people should have at least a week to see what this enormous spending plan includes. President Clinton proposed a $16 billion stimulus his first year in office. Congress rejected it for being too expensive. Now Democrats in Congress are proposing a stimulus that could cost taxpayers more than 50 times what President Clinton’s would have cost.
“This potentially $1 trillion bill would be one of the largest spending bills in U.S. history. It would increase the deficit by half a trillion dollars overnight and deepen an already enormous national debt. Before we agree to it, the American people need to see the details. They need to be able to see for themselves whether this is money well spent. And if lawmakers think that it is, then they need to make a convincing case to the people who are paying for it.
“Sixteen years ago, we rejected a stimulus the size of the Minnesota state budget. We shouldn’t be rushed into voting for a bill that by any estimate will be bigger than all 50 state budgets combined, especially when many of the jobs it promises won’t even materialize for another year. If we’re serious about protecting the taxpayer, these projects will be awarded through a fair and open process, and allowed to compete with other priorities in the budget.
“We should encourage, not discourage questions about this bill in a reckless rush to meet an arbitrary deadline. And we should be open to new ideas aimed at protecting the taxpayer.
“Here are three of them:
“Congressional Democrats have talked about sending hundreds of billions of dollars to the states. If we loan these funds, rather than give them away, states will be far less likely to spend it frivolously. And the taxpayer would have greater assurance their money is well spent.
“Second, Congress has had nearly a year to review the Fiscal 2009 spending request. These remaining bills now make up a $400 billion Omnibus appropriations bill. This is a bill that meets the level of spending proposed for the stimulus, and it’s a bill that could pass Congress by Inauguration Day. If speed is one of our goals, it strikes me that passing the Omnibus achieves that goal.
“Third: middle class tax relief. One way to get more money into people’s pockets quickly is to increase the size of their paychecks immediately. An immediate 10% cut in taxes for nearly 30 million Americans would provide significant jolt to the economy that all of us want.
“These are ideas that both parties could agree on. Each of them is designed to protect and empower the taxpayer. Let’s consider them. But either way, the American people should be in on this spending plan because the potential for waste and abuse is enormous.
“Some loose-lipped local politicians have already described the grants as ‘free money’ from Washington. Others openly hope to use it on frivolous pet projects that no sensible taxpayer would sign off on if they had a choice. The American people don’t want to be pick pocketed, and they don’t want to be taken advantage of. They want a real return on their investment. And all of us should be eager to show that we understand the difference.
“President-elect Obama has said that a stimulus plan will have to create jobs, have an immediate impact, and lead to a strengthening of the long-term economy. Republicans agree, and we will help to ensure it by insisting on scrutiny and oversight in the face of pressure on Congressional Democrats from interest groups and local politicians.
“Here is an issue on which Republicans and Democrats can work together on a positive result for the American people. And my hope is that once we achieve it, we will have a model to build on for the remainder of the 111th Congress.
“The opportunities for cooperation are numerous. Throughout his campaign, President-elect Obama spoke about the importance of a strong national defense. He spoke of the need to reduce the national debt. He vowed to go through the budget line by line to cut wasteful programs. He pledged to cut taxes on virtually all Americans and on small businesses. And he promised to put America on the path to energy independence within the next 10 years. These are all goals Republicans support. At this moment, nothing should stand in the way of our achieving them together.
“I have told President-elect Obama that I’m eager to work with him. I have told him he can expect cooperation on the confirmation of qualified nominees to key cabinet posts, so the American people don’t have to worry about a power vacuum at places like the Pentagon, the State Department, Treasury or the Department of Homeland Security. And I have discussed with him something he already knows, but which is worth repeating on this first day of the new Congress: When it comes to new presidents, history offers a clear path to success and a clear path to failure.
“Some new presidents have chosen to work with the other party to confront the big issues of the day that neither party is willing or able to tackle on its own. Others have decided they would rather team up with members of their own party and focus on narrow, partisan issues that only appeal to a tiny sliver of the populace but which lack the support of the American mainstream.
“In my view, the choice at this particular moment is clear. If President-elect Obama pursues the former course, our chances of achieving a positive result for the American people will be strong. The parties will continue to disagree. This is good for a Democracy. But political conflict is not an end in itself. And at this moment we have an opportunity to show the American people that we know it.
“The Majority Leader has mentioned that this year, the opening of Congress coincides with two important anniversaries. The first is Senator Byrd’s 50th anniversary. This feat of longevity has no equal in the history of this body. And this is quite fitting for a senator who has no equal in the history of this body. When Robert Carlyle Byrd took the oath of office on January 7, 1959, he could not have known that he would be the longest serving senator in U.S. history, or that he would one day write this body’s definitive history. But through the support of his beloved Erma, his legendary devotion to our Constitution, and his tireless will to improve the lives of the people of his state, the Senior Senator from West Virginia has accomplished a remarkable feat. Today we honor him for it.
“The other anniversary we commemorate today is no doubt dear to Senator Byrd’s heart. One hundred fifty years ago this month, the Senate moved from its old home down the hall to the room we’re in. This transition meant far more in its day than the mere packing of books and rearranging of desks — because back then, as now, every expansion of the Capitol has come with a fresh realization of the great adaptability of the U.S. Constitution and as further proof of its greatness.
“According to the Congressional Record, the man who was selected to speak on the occasion of the Senate’s relocation in 1859 was John Breckenridge, a Democrat and a Kentuckian who served as Vice President under President Buchanan. In his remarks, Breckenridge offered an eloquent lesson on the history of the Senate and, after paying appropriate tribute to the heroes of the Revolution, he made an intriguing suggestion to the senators of his day. Breckenridge suggested that the senators of 1859 had even greater responsibilities than the senators of 1789 because, as he put it, ‘the population, extent, and the power of our country surpass the dawning promise of its origin.’
“If this was true in 1859, then it is truer still in 2009. Americans have seen quite vividly over the past eight years, and even over the past few months, that the challenges which confront America, and our response to those challenges, have a powerful effect on the wider world. Not a single member of this body is unaware of the profound impact of his or her decisions. And that is why not a single senator in this body wishes anything but the best to President-elect Obama.
“Despite party differences, all of us feel a certain institutional pride in having one of our own in the White House. And every American will feel a special national pride when, for the first time in our nation’s history, a black man raises his hand to recite the oath of office from the Capitol steps.
“The President-elect has promised leadership that sees beyond the politics of division. But that responsibility does not rest with the President alone. It rests with all of us. Before Inauguration Day, there is the opening of this 111th Congress. This too is a great civic ritual. And this too should renew our optimism about the future of America and our optimism about achieving something important for the American people over these next two years. Now is our chance to deliver — not just in word, but in deed. This is a solemn charge. For some, it might cut against the grain. But if we are to have a future worthy of our past, it’s a charge that must be kept.”
PermalinkPosted: January 6, 2009 at 5:06:06 PM EST
McConnell: We Simply Cannot Ask the American Taxpayer to Subsidize Failure
‘Americans are also worried about the prospect of the government intervening on behalf of some industries and not intervening on behalf of others — especially when there is no guarantee it that the interventions will work. They wonder when the spending stops. If I were to vote in favor of this bill, I would not have a good answer for them’
WASHINGTON, D.C. –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding proposed auto legislation:
“These are turbulent times for the U.S. economy. Over the past several months, Americans have seen giant companies fail, significant job losses, and, after unprecedented problems in the credit markets, the frightening prospect of total disarray within our nation’s Main Street economy.
“The crisis in the credit markets came at us quickly. We were told that urgent government action was needed in order to shore up the broader economy — and that failure to act would lead to a complete collapse of consumer credit, the very lifeblood of our nation’s economy.
“Under ordinary circumstances, I would have opposed such a measure. Government intervention in the marketplace cuts against all my ordinary impulses. But this was not an ordinary event. I, and many others, believed that extraordinary action was needed to protect millions of ordinary Americans from the colossal and far-reaching mistakes of a few. And action was taken.
“The systemic breakdown that some envisioned has not occurred, so there is reason to believe that the medicine has had some effect. But, on the whole, the overall economy continues to struggle. Some industries have been hit harder than others. And one of them is the auto industry.
“The problems in the auto industry have been long in the making. But last month the situation grew so dire that American automakers came to Washington with an urgent appeal for federal help. Over the past few weeks, lawmakers have taken the time to examine the problems at these companies and the solutions that they have proposed. And now the American taxpayers are being asked to put their money behind a plan that is aimed at helping these companies survive.
“Republicans received that plan late yesterday morning. We reviewed it closely to see if it meets the criteria that I have laid out repeatedly for taxpayer-protections and an effective strategy for securing the long-term viability of these companies. In the end, I concluded that it does not.
“In some ways, the proposal that was worked out by the White House and Congressional Democrats appears tough. It calls on struggling auto companies and autoworkers to make the sort of sacrifices they have not been accustomed to making in the past. It also includes time limits as a way of hastening necessary reforms. But in reality, this proposal isn’t nearly tough enough.
“A primary weakness relates to the so-called ‘Car Czar,’ who has nearly unlimited power to allocate taxpayer dollars but limited ability to force the kinds of tough concessions that long-term viability would require.
“Another problem lies outside the proposal itself. And here I’m referring to the type of government action that’s being contemplated. Somewhat lost in the recent debate over the auto industry is the fundamental difference between it and the financial rescue plan that Congress approved in October. While that plan was intended to rescue the entire economy, this one is intended to save a single industry. That plan was intended to help everyone — from small business owners to college students; and every lawmaker who voted for it acted on the belief that that is what it would do.
“A failure to appreciate this distinction has caused a number of other industries and even a number of municipalities across the country to prepare their own proposals for a government rescue as all Americans weather the tough economy. It has also created the impression in some minds that the federal government is picking favorites, and that favored businesses get help while others don’t.
“A lot of struggling Americans are asking where their bailout is. They wonder why one business would get support over another. When it comes to the auto industry, many Republicans in Congress have asked these same questions.
“There are many principled reasons to oppose this bill. But the simplest one is also the best: ‘a government big enough to give us everything we want is a government big enough to take everything we have.’ This is as true for individuals as it is for business. It’s the primary principle on which American industry, including the auto industry, was built. And even in turbulent moments like this — perhaps especially at moments like this — it’s a principle well worth defending.
“Some argue that the effects of an auto industry collapse would be too acute and far-reaching for an already-struggling economy to bear. This is impossible to know. And even if we grant that these companies would fail without taxpayer help, we would still have to ask ourselves whether the proposal before us achieves the goal that everyone claims to embrace — namely, the long-term viability of ailing car companies — and, in my view, it does not.
“I have already enumerated some of the weaknesses in the plan. But in the end, its greatest single flaw is that it promises taxpayer money today for reforms that may or may not come tomorrow. And we would not be serving the American taxpayer well if we spent their hard-earned money without knowing with certainty that their investment would result in stronger, leaner auto companies that would not need additional taxpayer help just a few months or weeks down the road.
“We simply cannot ask the American taxpayer to subsidize failure.
“All Americans, including myself, are worried about the future of our nation’s automakers. These companies have a venerable place in the story of modern America. They continue to provide hundreds of thousands of jobs across the country, including nearly 50,000 auto-related jobs in my own home state of Kentucky.
“But many Americans are also worried about the prospect of the government intervening on behalf of some industries and not intervening on behalf of others — especially when there is no guarantee it that the interventions will work. They wonder when the spending stops. If I were to vote in favor of this bill, I would not have a good answer for them.
“The best route for the long-term viability of ailing car companies may be a rocky one. Government help is not the only option. It’s not even the best option. Long-term viability is still possible. But it’s only possible if these companies are forced to make the tough choices necessary for their survival.
“Senator Corker has proposed an amendment that would go a long way toward improving this bill. In keeping with the principles I’ve outlined, the Corker Amendment does not just encourage reform, it requires it. And it does so with crucial specificity. First, participating companies would be required to reduce their outstanding debt by at least two-thirds through an equity swap with bondholders.
“The Corker Amendment also requires that labor costs at participating companies be brought on par with companies like Nissan, Toyota, and Honda — not tomorrow but immediately — because it is delusional to think that a company which spends $71 per labor hour could compete with a company in the same industry that spends $49.
“The Corker Amendment would improve the liquidity and cash-flow of automakers by requiring that a portion of the payments made to union accounts consist of company stock.
“And finally, the Corker Amendment would require participating companies to file for Chapter 11 reorganization if any of these conditions aren’t met by a fixed date.
“The Corker Amendment forces necessary reforms, holds companies accountable, and assures taxpayers that these companies won’t be back for more. If legislative action were necessary, the Corker proposal would make many much needed and dramatic improvements to the underlying bill.
“I, like all of my colleagues, want the U.S. auto industry not only to survive but to thrive. And by cutting costs, streamlining production, increasing fuel efficiency, and investing in new technologies and attractive, more competitive designs, American auto companies will once again make cars that people all over the world will want to buy. Then Americans will be able to say again with pride that our cars are the best.
“In addition protecting the taxpayer, this is a goal that Republicans have been fighting hard for in this debate. And in my view, it’s a goal that is well worth our efforts.”
PermalinkPosted: December 11, 2008 at 2:03:05 PM EST
A Path to Accomplishment, Not Gridlock
42 Republican Senators call for bipartisan achievement, a voice for their more than 157 million constituents in legislative debate
WASHINGTON, D.C. –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell delivered a letter discussing the role of the Senate Minority to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Friday. The letter, signed by 42 Republicans representing more than 157 million Americans, calls on the Majority to work with Republicans to accomplish bipartisan legislative achievements. The text of the letter appears below:
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Reid:
As we begin our work together in the 111th Congress, Republican Senators are united in our support for the Senate’s Constitutional duty to freely debate and amend.
During the 110th Congress, the Senate was frequently stalled by periods of partisan gridlock. Too often in the previous Congress, legislation bypassed the committee process and was considered with no input from Republican Senators. Further, when those bills were considered on the floor and there were no opportunities for Republican Senators to offer any amendments, millions of our constituents from many states were denied the right to be heard. A record number of cloture petitions were filed, and the “amendment tree” was filled in order to stymie efforts of the Minority to shape legislation of critical importance to those very constituents. During the 111th Congress, we will need to work together across the aisle to ensure that the Senate returns to the regular practice and tradition of allowing all Senators their fundamental right to debate and amend legislation.
As Senator Robert C. Byrd told the incoming Senators-elect in 1996: ‘As long as the Senate retains the power to amend and the power of unlimited debate, the liberties of the people will remain secure.’
Senator Reid, we agree with your statement earlier this year that, ‘A filibuster is the minority’s way of not allowing the majority to shut off debate, and without robust debate, the Senate is crippled.’
As we learned in 2007, when Senators are permitted to fully debate and amend, we can work together to pass bipartisan legislation. The Senate passed several pieces of landmark legislation that were debated and amended with full participation from both Democrats and Republicans.
The leaders and bill managers worked together to structure debate so that Senators could consider and vote on different approaches to major issues. But we also learned that filling the tree and filing cloture to stifle the Minority’s right to debate and amend is invariably counter-productive.
As a caucus, Republicans will insist on our basic right to participate in the legislative process. The Republican Conference intends to protect the Senate’s history of full and open consideration of major legislation, which includes a fair amendment process and the opportunity for debate.
We look forward to working with you and your fellow Democratic Senators to enact legislation that will make a difference for the American people.
PermalinkPosted: November 24, 2008 at 2:26:12 PM EST
Republican Leadership Team Announced
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Senate Republican Conference held Leadership elections for the 111th Congress on Tuesday.
“We’ve assembled a great team which stands ready to protect American taxpayers by cutting spending, paying down the national debt, and moving our nation toward energy independence,” said Senator McConnell. “We are eager to work with our Democrat colleagues to forge bipartisan agreements and implement real legislative accomplishments.”
The results are as follows:
Republican Leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Republican Whip, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.)
Republican Conference Chair, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.)
Republican Policy Committee Chairman, Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.)
Republican Conference Vice Chair, John Thune (R-S.D.)
National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman, John Cornyn (R-Texas)
PermalinkPosted: November 18, 2008 at 2:07:31 PM EST
McConnell Statement On The Yet-To-Be-Written Democrat Spending/Bailout Bill
‘We owe it to the people of Nevada, Kentucky and all across America to make known the impact this bailout would have on the deficit; the taxpayers deserve to know if this bailout would increase the national debt and raise their taxes’
LOUISVILLE, Ky. –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement Friday in response to a letter from the Majority Leader regarding an as-yet unwritten spending and bailout bill:
“Senator Reid has not yet provided us with the text of his proposed spending bill, or the cost to the taxpayer, or its impact on the deficit. So it would be a real challenge to promise any level of support or opposition sight unseen. And while Sen. Reid’s public comments referenced our private conversation on the level of support for his yet unwritten bill, we don’t yet know if there is even sufficient support from within his own ranks. It would be helpful to know if a majority of his caucus even supports what he will propose. The silence from the Democrat rank and file on this matter has been deafening.
“We owe it to the people of Nevada, Kentucky and all across America to make known the impact this bailout would have on the deficit; the taxpayers deserve to know if this bailout would increase the national debt and raise their taxes. Perhaps when a bill is actually written, and its costs are known, both Republicans and Democrats can take a position on the legislation. But it sure would be helpful to actually see the bill before commenting on it.”
PermalinkPosted: November 17, 2008 at 9:17:14 AM EST
McConnell Statement on Working with President-elect Obama
WASHINGTON, D.C. –U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following statement on Wednesday on working with President-elect Obama and his administration:
“I congratulate President-elect Obama and will work with him on behalf of the American people. The Republican leadership stands ready to hear his ideas for implementing his campaign promises of cutting taxes, increasing energy security, reducing spending and easing the burden of an immense and growing national debt. On these, and other bipartisan issues, he will find cooperation in the Senate. We have an opportunity for significant accomplishments on behalf of the American people, and it is my hope and intent that we succeed in the years ahead.
“I fully anticipate that President-elect Obama will select well-qualified nominees for the key, early cabinet secretary nominations. And if so, he can count on my support for timely consideration and assistance to ensure a smooth transition for our national, homeland and economic security posts. These times are too important not to move quickly together.”
PermalinkPosted: November 7, 2008 at 12:55:22 PM EST
McConnell: Senate Will Act to Protect Main Street
‘The situation we find ourselves in is serious, it is urgent, and failing to act now could have devastating consequences for our nation’s economy’
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday regarding the economic rescue plan:
“Less than two weeks ago, the Treasury Secretary came to the American people with some bad news. He said he needed Congress to help. And soon, after significant debate, Congress will deliver.
“The problem we face as a nation is urgent and unprecedented. As a result of lax lending practices earlier in the decade, millions of Americans now find themselves either delinquent or unable to cover their mortgages.
“If this were the only problem, we could address it individually by helping those who were victims of fraud and letting those who made bad judgments or who lied on their loan applications pay for their mistakes.
“But what began as a problem in the subprime mortgage market has now spread throughout the entire economy. And here’s where the crisis hits home.
“After banks made these risky mortgages, they sold them. The institutions they sold them to then shopped them around the world. And now these troubled assets are frozen on the balance sheets of the businesses that you and I rely on to buy everything from dishwashers to new homes.
“At the heart of the rescue plan is a need to lift these assets off the books, and to restore confidence in the institutions that hold them. Then, once the housing market stabilizes, we’ll sell them back.
“Many economists, including those at the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, predict that once the assets are sold off over the next few years, the net loss to taxpayers could be negligible.
“But for now, the practical problem we face is this: credit, the lifeblood of our economy, is frozen. And unless we act, it’s expected to remain that way.
“This means that the lives of ordinary American families could be severely disrupted, commerce could dry up, and millions of jobs could be lost.
“The original White House proposal for addressing this crisis was unacceptable to members on both sides in its initial form. But both parties have since made sure that the taxpayers are protected once a final deal is reached.
“For my part, I came to the Senate floor and put down a firm marker: if Congress was going to help companies that got us into this mess, then executives at these companies would play by our rules. I also said that the government wouldn’t be allowed to use this plan as an excuse to fund new programs. No golden parachutes. Limits on executive pay. And no favors for special interests.
“Thanks to bipartisan insistence on all of these points, the plan that the House voted on earlier this week included every single one of our initial demands. And so does the plan that the Senate will vote on tonight.
“This process hasn’t been easy.
“For the past week, members of Congress and their staffs have worked around the clock to craft a rescue plan that’s designed to protect American families from the shockwaves of the credit crisis.
“When that plan failed in the House, we picked up the pieces, and we put together an even better plan that we think will make it through the House, and onto the President’s desk — this week.
“It’s important that we act now, because the crisis is spreading.
“Small business owners in Kentucky are writing urgent letters to my office saying that their interest rates are already skyrocketing and putting their businesses — and employees’ jobs — at risk.
“A woman in Central Kentucky wrote that she’s afraid she’ll have to sell off part of her family’s farm.
“A retired school counselor wrote to say she can’t afford to see her small retirement savings vanish.
“A small business owner in La Grange told me he’s worried about the effect on his business and his employees because, in just the past week, the interest rate on the loan he took out to finance his office building more than tripled.
“The current crisis may have its roots in the actions of a few. But its effects could potentially reach into every single home in Kentucky, and every other home in America.
“This economic rescue plan is a necessary effort to protect the vast majority of Americans — whose day-to-day lives depend on ready access to credit — from the misdeeds of Wall Street. And, at this point, doing nothing to prevent an economic collapse is no longer an option.
“Here’s what the second-largest newspaper in America, The Wall Street Journal, said about the rescue plan earlier this week: ‘It deserves to pass because in reality it is an attempt to shield middle America from further harm caused by the mistakes of Wall Street and Washington’ … ‘The current seizure in the credit markets is real,’ the Journal added, ‘and it will do far more harm if not repaired soon …’
“For lawmakers, failing to pass this economic rescue plan would be grossly irresponsible. The voters sent us to Washington to respond to crises, not to ignore them.
“To that end, we have acted swiftly. And lawmakers from both political parties have worked hard to protect taxpayers at the beginning and at the end of this plan.
“Thanks to our insistence, this rescue plan will have strong federal oversight. Not only will there be a strong and diverse executive oversight board watching every single transaction, but we will also have the ability to investigate, pursue, and punish any executive who engages in fraud or who attempts to use this plan for personal enrichment.
“If the government is forced to take over the biggest companies, the first thing we will do is wipe out existing compensation packages for failed executives. Then, we fire them.
“For most other institutions we assist, failed executives will no longer get million dollar payouts. And those who previously negotiated severance packages will pay one fifth of them in taxes — on top of the standard thirty to forty percent tax currently in place. This means that executives at these firms will have to hand over more than half of their existing pay packages to the taxpayer.
“Moreover, no executive who hasn’t already worked out a compensation package will be allowed to get one. At these companies, the days of golden parachutes are over.
“As another way of protecting taxpayers, Republicans insisted early on that every dollar the government gets back as a result of this program goes directly to reduce the federal debt. This plan guarantees it. Every dime we get back will be used to pay our debts.
“Since Monday’s House vote, we’ve made some significant improvements to the bill. In order to protect bank customers, Congress will allow the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to insure deposits up to $250,000 for one year, up from the current $100,000.
“We also added significant tax relief for American families and businesses, including a temporary patch on the AMT middle class tax that will protect millions of Americans — including 135,000 Kentuckians — from an average $2,000 increase in their annual tax bill.
“At the moment, this plan represents the best way to bring stability to the credit markets, avoid a credit meltdown, and put America on the road to economic recovery. But Congress's job does not end there. After completing this bipartisan effort, members of Congress must recommit ourselves in strengthening America's long-term economic security.
“We should refocus our attention on a balanced energy plan that enables us to find more American energy resources and use less, and by refusing to spend money we do not have on programs that we do not need, thus laying a strong economic foundation for our children to inherit.
“Soon, Senators will cast this historic vote. And when we do, the American taxpayers should know this: this plan was written with their best interests in mind. Not a dime will be spent without strict oversight. Failed executives will be held accountable. No more golden parachutes. And, in the end, the American people can expect to recoup most, if not all or even more of the money that is spent.
“This legislation is not something any of us wanted to consider. Under ordinary circumstances, high-flying businessmen who make bad decisions or abuse shareholder trust should be allowed to fail. But the situation we find ourselves in is serious, it is urgent, and failing to act now could have devastating consequences for our nation’s economy.
“We must contain the damage. The potential consequences of inaction for our Main Street economy are simply too great.”
PermalinkPosted: October 1, 2008 at 5:04:14 PM EDT
McConnell: Economic Rescue Plan: Senate to Vote Tonight
The American people ‘expect us to rise to big challenges and to put aside differences and to work on their behalf’
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday regarding the economic rescue plan:
“After Monday’s vote in the house, the question is not how we got here, but how we get out. And to get our economy back on its feet.
“So after extensive consultation between the Majority Leader and myself and the leaders in both parties here in the Senate, we believe that we have crafted a way to go forward and to get us back on track.
“This is the only way to get the right kind of solution for the American people.
“Both Senator Obama and Senator McCain are coming back tonight to embrace this effort and to help us reassure the American people that we’re going to fix this problem.
“No one is happy with the situation that we’re in, but it’s a situation that we have. And the American people didn’t send us here just to do easy things. They expect us to rise to big challenges and to put aside differences and to work on their behalf.
“So tonight the Senate will vote on an economic rescue plan designed to shield millions of Americans from shockwaves of a problem they didn’t create.
“Now, Mr. President, we have two problems. We have the equity markets and we have the credit markets. And a way of thinking of it is like this: Our whole economy, you could think of as the human body, but the credit markets as the circulatory system.
“Right now, as the distinguished Majority Leader pointed out, the credit markets are frozen. And so the circulatory system is not working as it should. If the circulatory system doesn’t work, then it begins to choke off the body, the economy.
“So with the step we take tonight, we’re confident we will be able to restore the circulatory system, if you will, regain health to the economy, the body, if you will; and get the problem fixed for the American people.
“Now, I said yesterday we’re going to fix this problem this week.
“The Senate will speak tonight. We will send to the House a package that if passed will address the issue.
“We will have demonstrated to the American people that we could deal with a crisis in the most difficult of times, right before an election, when the tendency to be the most partisan is the greatest.
“We’re in the process of setting that aside, rising to the challenge, both Democrats and Republicans, and doing what’s right for the American people.”
PermalinkPosted: October 1, 2008 at 3:44:27 PM EDT
Senate Dems: Let Them Eat Cake
Senate Democrat Campaign Chairman Dismisses High Gas Prices Saying The “Issue Has Peaked” And Americans Are Satisfied That Congress Is “Trying”
POLITICO: “Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) predicted Monday that “the drilling issue has peaked,” convinced that voters will not punish Democrats this November for the high price of gas.” (“Schumer: ‘The drilling issue has peaked,’” Politico, 08/25/08)
“It has just been out there and as people think it through ... they just want to make sure [Congress] is trying everything,” Schumer said during a roundtable discussion with Politico reporters and editors. (“Schumer: ‘The drilling issue has peaked,’” Politico, 08/25/08)
FLASHBACK
Schumer Suggests Congress Will Not Act This Session To Address High Gas Prices
WASHINGTON POST: “Schumer suggested…Congress will not move on a large energy plan until after the election. If Obama is elected and Democrats gain larger majorities in Congress, Schumer said, ‘You will get, for the first time, a real energy policy.’” (“Oil May Become GOP's 2008 Issue,” The Washington Post, 07/27/08)
PermalinkPosted: August 26, 2008 at 10:03:37 AM EDT
T. Boone Pickens vs. Democrat Energy Plans
Dems Pick Pickens To Headline Energy Summit Despite His Opposition To Their Energy Plans
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “We all talk about the problem. T. Boone Pickens is talking about a solution. And he's put his money where his mouth is. So listen to T. Boone Pickens… and our country will head in the right direction.” (Sen. Reid, Press Conference, 07/17/08)
T. BOONE PICKENS ON DOMESTIC EXPLORATION
On Domestic Exploration:“I see everything American as good…Offshore, OCS drilling, ANWR drilling, yes, all of it. I want to see all of it. I want to get off of foreign oil. Yes, all of that.” (Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 07/22/08)
T. BOONE PICKENS ON THE DEMOCRATS’ ENERGY PLANS
On Blaming Energy Companies For High Prices: “This doesn't have anything to do with Exxon or Chevron or some speculator running up the price.” (“Pickens’ Big Ideas For Wind Energy Heard By Four Senators,” Congress Daily PM, 07/22/08)
On The Democrats’ Speculation Bill: “They're wasting their time. Speculators are not running up the price of oil.” (“Senate Clears Hurdle For Oil Speculation Bill,” Bloomberg.com, 07/22/08)
DEMOCRATS ON T. BOONE PICKENS
SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL):“T. Boone Pickens Is Right.” “T. Boone Pickens is right; we need a much bolder and much bigger set of solutions.” (Sen. Obama, Remarks To Michigan State University, Lansing, MI, 08/04/08)
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “T. Boone Pickens Has Done A Wonderful Job Of Pointing Out To The American People What The Solution Is.” “…the name of T. Boone Pickens. Eighty-one years old, and he has suddenly become bipartisan. I am happy about that. I have great admiration and respect for T. Boone Pickens. … T. Boone Pickens has done a wonderful job of pointing out to the American people what the solution is.” (Sen. Reid, Congressional Record, S.7092, 07/23/08)
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): “What Is The Long-Term Answer? Well, The Long-Term Answer Can Be Found From A Number Of People, One Of Whom Is A Fellow Whose Name You Can Hardly Ever Forget: T. Boone Pickens." (Sen. Durbin, Congressional Record, S.7000, 07/22/08)
PermalinkPosted: August 20, 2008 at 10:25:52 AM EDT
Washington Speak: Gas Price Edition
Senate Democrats Tell Their Constituents They Are “Open” To Domestic Production While They Leave Town Without Holding A Vote
SEN. BEN NELSON (D-NE):“We Have To Do Some Drilling. Let’s Accept The Fact That We Have To Do Some Drilling.”(Fox News’ “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” 07/07/08) SEN. BLANCHE LINCOLN (D-AR): “I Think You Would Find A Lot Of Support For Offshore Drilling.”“I think you would find a lot of support for offshore drilling if it was tied to other things like -- renewable fuels, wind energy, solar energy & other renewable transportation fuels.” (“Offshore Drilling?” KNWA, 06/24/08) SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D-ND): “I Support Drilling Offshore.” (Sen. Dorgan, Congressional Record, S.6351-2, 07/07/08)
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA): “We Have To Drill In More Places As Quickly As We Can” “And we want to force the leadership of the Republicans and the Democrats to come to terms with reality, which is, we have to drill in more places as quickly as we can, of which I am a big proponent.” (Fox News’ “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” 07/08/08)
SEN. JIM WEBB (D-VA): “I Am Not Opposed Personally To The Idea Of Expanding Exploration For Oil And For Gas, and in those cases where it is appropriate to get down and find the assets that are available to us as a nation and increase our national security.” (Sen. Jim Webb, Remarks On The Senate Floor, 07/31/08) SEN. TOM CARPER (D-DE): “Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) Said He Sensed There Were Enough Votes From His Democratic Colleagues To Expand Offshore Drilling Into New Areas…”(“Dems Searching Their Souls On Drilling,” Politico, 07/10/08)
SEN. JEFF BINGAMAN (D-NM):“I've Supported Increased Production Of Domestic Oil And Gas. And I Also Think It Makes Sense To Look At Whether Or Not There Are Some Areas In The Outer Continental Shelf That Could Be Opened For Production.”“First of all, as all of you know, I'm from an oil producing state, oil and gas producing state, and I've supported increased production of domestic oil and gas. And I also think it makes sense to look at whether or not there are some areas in the outer continental shelf that could be opened for production in addition to what's already open.” (Sen. Bingaman, Press Conference, 07/14/08) SEN. JOHN TESTER (D-MT): “[W]e Must Take Advantage Of Our Untapped Oil resources In Places Where It Makes Sense.”“Although our country cannot simply drill our way out of this energy crisis, we must take advantage of our untapped oil resources in places where it makes sense.” (“Guest Column From Senator Tester: Energy Independence This Independence Day,” 06/30/08)
SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-OH): “Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, Who Had Adamantly Opposed Such Drilling, Is Among Those Warming To The Idea.He says any exploration would have to be far from the coast and that the oil produced would be used in the United States, not abroad.” (“Do We Lift The Ban On Offshore Drilling?” The Columbus Dispatch, 07/11/08)
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D-ND): “We Have Got To Deal With Conserving, Using Less. We Also Have To Produce More.” “Well, I think we all know there are several elements to this. We have got to deal with conserving, using less. We also have to produce more. Those are the two sides of the equation in terms of the supply/demand relationship.” (CNN’s “American Morning,” 07/15/08) SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): “We Need To Really Sit Down And Talk About All The Options On The Table.”“Partisan bickering will not lower gas prices or put us on a course toward energy independence. … We need to really sit down and talk about all the options on the table, evaluate their merits and move full speed ahead on meaningful reform.” (Sen. Mark Pryor, Letter To Senators Harry Reid And Mitch McConnell, 06/26/08)
“Frustrated” Democrats Suggest Nominee and Leaders “Are Not Ready To Embrace The Idea Of Bipartisan Compromise” And Are Content To Make Americans Wait “Until After The Election” For Energy Plan
THE WASHINGTON POST: “Schumer suggested…Congress will not move on a large energy plan until after the election. If Obama is elected and Democrats gain larger majorities in Congress, Schumer said, ‘You will get, for the first time, a real energy policy.’” (“Oil May Become GOP's 2008 Issue,” The Washington Post, 07/27/08)
THE NEW YORK TIMES: “Democratic leaders in the Senate also are not ready to embrace the idea of a bipartisan compromise on energy legislation, in part out of concern about adopting a position at odds with their expected presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.” (“Congress Feels Pressure for Action on Oil Prices,” The New York Times, 07/09/08)
ROLL CALL: “Privately, Democrats have been frustrated that Obama took such a long time to come out with a comprehensive energy policy and that his new plan appeared to be more about checking the box than engaging in a larger national debate on the issue…..”The aide added, “A lot of Democrats were waiting for him to come out with something, and he left us flat-footed. ... We didn’t want to step on his toes, and now, we have some ground to make up.” (“Energy Politics Debated”, Roll Call, 07/21/08)
DOW JONES: “While U.S. Democrats consider a bill that seeks to rein in speculation in the petroleum markets, they've suddenly found themselves on the defensive from an orchestrated Republican attack pushing the majority to ‘Drill More, Use Less.’” (“Dems On The Defensive Over GOP Push For More Oil,” Dow Jones, 07/24/08)
CQ: “Democratic leaders have tried to stave off a floor vote on the issue, in part, GOP leaders say, out of fear that some Democrats may cast pro-drilling votes.” (“Republicans Refuse to Discuss Futures Bill Without Coastal Drilling Vote,” CQ Today, 07/24/08)
THE HILL: “But the GOP is positioning itself as the party willing to do whatever it takes to lower gas prices. The Republicans say Democrats are scared to cast votes on new drilling in the face of voter anger over high gasoline prices, and they point to the majority's decision to scrap appropriations bills to avoid a debate over lifting the congressional ban on drilling along the Outer Continental Shelf.” (“Senate GOP issues ultimatum to expand oil drilling,” The Hill, 07/24/08)
POLITICO: “Democratic leaders, caught off guard by a swing in public opinion and undermined by some of their own members, are scrambling to run down the clock on calls to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling.” (“‘Gang Of 10’ Fights For Increased Drilling,” Politico, 07/23/08)
Meanwhile…13 Democrats Tell Their Constituents “We Have To Do Some Drilling”
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D-ND): “We Have Got To Deal With Conserving, Using Less. We Also Have To Produce More.” “Well, I think we all know there are several elements to this. We have got to deal with conserving, using less. We also have to produce more. Those are the two sides of the equation in terms of the supply/demand relationship.” (CNN’s “American Morning,” 07/15/08)
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA):“There’s Going To Be Substantially More Drilling.”“‘There’s going to be substantially more drilling and substantially more conservation,’ Sen. Mary L. Landrieu (D-La.) said of the plan her moderate colleagues are hoping to cobble together.” (“‘Gang Of 10’ Fights For Increased Drilling,” Politico, 07/23/08)
SEN. JEFF BINGAMAN (D-NM):“I've Supported Increased Production Of Domestic Oil And Gas. And I Also Think It Makes Sense To Look At Whether Or Not There Are Some Areas In The Outer Continental Shelf That Could Be Opened For Production.”“First of all, as all of you know, I'm from an oil producing state, oil and gas producing state, and I've supported increased production of domestic oil and gas. And I also think it makes sense to look at whether or not there are some areas in the outer continental shelf that could be opened for production in addition to what's already open.” (Sen. Bingaman, Press Conference, 07/14/08)
SEN. BEN NELSON (D-NE):“We Have To Do Some Drilling. Let’s Accept The Fact That We Have To Do Some Drilling.”(Fox News’ “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” 07/07/08)
SEN. BLANCHE LINCOLN (D-AR): “I Think You Would Find A Lot Of Support For Offshore Drilling.”“I think you would find a lot of support for offshore drilling if it was tied to other things like -- renewable fuels, wind energy, solar energy & other renewable transportation fuels.” (“Offshore Drilling?” KNWA, 06/24/08)
SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D-ND): “I Support Drilling Offshore.” (Sen. Dorgan, Congressional Record, S.6351-2, 07/07/08)
SEN. JOHN TESTER (D-MT): “[W]e Must Take Advantage Of Our Untapped Oil resources In Places Where It Makes Sense.”“Although our country cannot simply drill our way out of this energy crisis, we must take advantage of our untapped oil resources in places where it makes sense.” (“Guest Column From Senator Tester: Energy Independence This Independence Day,” 06/30/08)
SEN. SHERROD BROWN (D-OH): “Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, Who Had Adamantly Opposed Such Drilling, Is Among Those Warming To The Idea.He says any exploration would have to be far from the coast and that the oil produced would be used in the United States, not abroad.” (“Do We Lift The Ban On Offshore Drilling?” The Columbus Dispatch, 07/11/08)
SEN. JIM WEBB (D-VA): “We Need To Look At All Our Assets.”“Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), fresh from his GI Bill victory, said that he is now making energy a major priority. ‘We need to look at all our assets,’ he said, suggesting a large package including expanded offshore drilling, alternative energy, nuclear power and technology to make coal cleaner.” (“Dems Searching Their Souls On Drilling,” Politico, 07/10/08)
SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): “We Need To Really Sit Down And Talk About All The Options On The Table.”“Partisan bickering will not lower gas prices or put us on a course toward energy independence. … We need to really sit down and talk about all the options on the table, evaluate their merits and move full speed ahead on meaningful reform.” (Sen. Mark Pryor, Letter To Senators Harry Reid And Mitch McConnell, 06/26/08)
Dems Cite Speculation Stats That Don't Match The Facts
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “Academics, economists say that the costs of oil is 20% to 50% speculation.” (Sen. Harry Reid, Remarks on the Senate Floor, 07/22/08)
“ACADEMICS AND ECONOMISTS” ACTUALLY SAY “IT’S NOT SPECULATION, IT IS SUPPLY AND DEMAND”
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY: “There is little evidence that large investment flows into the futures market are causing an imbalance between supply and demand, and are therefore contributing to high oil prices… Blaming speculation is an easy solution which avoids taking the necessary steps to improve supply-side access and investment or to implement measures to improve energy efficiency.” (International Energy Agency, Medium-Term Oil Market Report, July 2008)
FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN BEN BERNANKE: “If financial speculation were pushing all prices above the level consistent with the fundamentals of supply and demand, we would expect inventories of crude oil and petroleum products to increase as supply rose and demand fell. But, in fact, available data on oil inventories shows notable declines over the past year.” (Ben Bernanke, Chairman Of The Federal Reserve, 7/15/2008)
JOHN CHAPMAN, AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE: “The truth is that increased speculation in oil futures is not a cause of rising oil prices, but rather an effect of those prices, which have skyrocketed due to growth in global demand, geopolitical instability, and constricted supply in several producing countries. (John Chapman, Researcher at the American Enterprise Institute, 7/16/2008)
MICHAEL HAIGH, FORMER CHIEF ASSOCIATE CHIEF ECONOMIST WITH THE CFTC: “If Congress is literally going over the CFTC's head and talking about imposing legislation or making the CFTC exercise its emergency powers to limit excess speculation when they don't even know what that means. I don't even know what excess speculation means.” (Michael Haigh, Senior Commodity Analyst At Societe Generale Corporate And Investment Banking And Former Associate Chief Economist With The CFTC, 6/30/2008)
PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES COLUMNIST: “On any given day, expectations determine the price; but the spot market also has to clear, and the way this happens is that excess supply must be added to physical stocks. Even with fairly inelastic supply and demand, any large speculative deviation from the 'fundamental' price should show up in a noticeable increase in inventories.” (Paul Krugman, New York Times Columnist, 6/28/08)
All Ideas Were Welcome When Gas Was A Fraction Of Today’s Price
Majority Suggests Americans Who Are Struggling With Today’s Skyrocketing Gas Prices Aren’t Worthy Of A Similar Debate
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “They can offer their drilling amendment, and we would offer our own alternative. Both measures would receive a vote. That is how the legislative process is supposed to work.” (“Road Map: Reid Says One Amendment Each About Right,” Roll Call, 07/22/08)
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA)
