
Until gas prices begin to come down, Republicans will continue to blame the spike on President Obama -- whose policies, they claim, have squelched U.S. energy production broadly.
"Over the past three years, President Obama has delayed, blocked, and restricted access to America's energy resources, leading to a seven percent drop in federal energy production and no real options to address the energy crisis we face today," wrote House Speaker John Boehner in a column published by his Ohio office. "[T]he administration's regulatory onslaught is having a direct impact here in Ohio. Most recently, GenOn Energy announced it will be closing plants in Avon Lake and Niles because of excessive government regulations. Reports indicate the company is unsure of how many, if any, of the jobs at those Ohio facilities it will be able to preserve. These job losses are a direct result of this administration's policies."
The argument has a tenuous connection to fuel and energy prices. But if Obama's held a heavy hand over American oil, surely it would be reflected in the labor market for extraction jobs, right?
Quite the opposite.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)On Monday, Rick Santorum raised the bar for high-fuel price hysteria.
"The housing bubble was caused because of a dramatic spike in energy prices that caused the housing bubble to burst," Santorum told an audience in Colorado.
Well, fuel prices are on the rise again, and in defiance of the logic of the market, Republicans across the country want to hold President Obama and the Democrats to account. In Santorum's scenario, Obama is risking yet another worldwide financial crisis by not drilling in ANWR or green lighting the Keystone XL oil pipeline.
Here's what Dean Baker, who was miles ahead of most economists in giving early warnings about the housing bubble, said about Santorum's theory.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)In Washington, DC, the fight over the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline mostly divides common enemies: Republicans and Democrats; environmentalists and fossil fuel interests; big business and the federal bureaucracy.
But though the project exists in a state of suspended animation, TransCanada -- the company that wants to connect the tar sands in Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico -- is preparing to build anyhow. In particular, on the portion of the pipeline that would link Nebraska to Texas, TransCanada has threatened to use disputed eminent domain powers to condemn privately held land, over the owners' objections. And that's creating unusual allies -- Occupiers, Tea Partiers, environmentalists, individualists -- united to stop TransCanada from threatening water supplies, ancient artifacts, and people's basic property rights.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)One of Aristotle's laws of nature is that every time fuel prices rise, political snake oil salesmen come out of hiding to blame it on their enemies: They attribute (or implicitly link) cost spikes to the other party's policy decisions. The solution, they always say, lies in the policies they've advocated since what feels like the beginning of time.
This happens every few years, and every few years it's total nonsense.
Since it's happening again, and since the press seems once again more concerned about the political implications of rising gas prices than with actual forces driving them up, TPM turned to energy expert Robert Rapier for an analyst's view.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
House Republicans made a conscious choice to undercut the Keystone XL oil pipeline project, even though members of their own party strongly support it. The politics were too ripe.
But just how badly have they undercut it? It's not a stretch to say that politicking the issue will cost TransCanada -- the firm that was to build the pipeline -- huge sums of money, and may just be the project's death knell.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)At the peak of December's payroll tax cut showdown on Capitol Hill, two top Republican aides discussed with me the pros and cons of making the Keystone XL pipeline a centerpiece of the debate.
They relished the idea of forcing President Obama to take a public stand on the pipeline early in an election year, instead of after the election as he had wanted. And they were eager to force him to choose between supporters in the labor movement, some of whom are pushing for the pipeline, and others in the environmental movement who vehemently oppose it. So they decided to go for it.
At the same time they knew he'd likely have to reject the project, and for them that created a dilemma.
"It's a question of whether we'd rather have the pipeline or the issue," said one of the GOP aides. Black or white.
In the end they chose the issue.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)A key Democrat tasked with helping to negotiate a full-year extension of the payroll tax cut, unemployment benefits, and Medicare physician reimbursements says Republicans will have to move significantly off their December demands or all three will lapse.
"We want to extend the middle class tax cut, we want to extend unemployment insurance, and we want to keep our promise to Medicare beneficiaries that we're going to pay for their doctors, so they can have access to their physicians," Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) told me in a brief interview off the House floor Tuesday. "But I'm not going to support something to pay for that by cutting Medicare or cutting the middle class. We can reach an agreement on these things, but the Republicans are going to have to move."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Democrats and the White House are executing a strategy to prevent House Republicans from jamming them with legislation to extend the current payroll tax cut that's been larded up with GOP goodies, according to White House and Congressional aides. For all practical purposes, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has linked the payroll tax issue -- and other key end-of-the-year issues -- with legislation to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year. And he's presenting Republicans with a choice: deal in good faith on the payroll tax issue, or trigger a government shutdown.
Democrats were worried that House Republicans would close ranks around a version of a payroll holiday that included both must-pass items (such as an extension of unemployment insurance and a patch to prevent Medicare physicians from experiencing a severe pay cut on the first of the year) and GOP poison pills (including a provision forcing the Obama administration to give thumbs-up or thumbs-down to the Keystone XL oil pipeline within 60 days)...then pass it and skip town, leaving Democrats little choice but to swallow their bill whole.
That's exactly the strategy they tried to execute -- and until late Monday it looked like it might work.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)At a breakfast roundtable with reporters hosted by the Christian Science Monitor, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said he will not cross the aisle and support GOP legislation to extend the current payroll tax cut, which is expected to pass the House later today.
"I wouldn't accept the House bill," Lieberman said.
In a bid to consolidate support within their caucus -- and to flip the bird to President Obama -- House Republicans have tacked a provision on to their payroll tax cut bill that would force the administration to decide whether to allow construction of the Keystone XL pipeline within 60 days, instead of after the election next year as the administration currently plans.
Though controversial outside of Washington, the pipeline has bipartisan support in Washington, and Republicans -- itching for this fight -- are banking on the idea that some Democrats will cross the aisle and put Senate Dems and Obama in a tough spot.
And to some extent they've been successful. Obama strongly suggested he'd veto the bill over the provision, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has called it dead on arrival, and many in the media have painted the GOP's bill as providing Dems a choice between passing the payroll tax cut and blocking the Keystone pipeline.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) says Republicans can forget about using the looming expiration of a year-long payroll tax holiday for workers to squeeze a host of unrelated conservative priorities through Congress, and projected confidently that her party has the GOP cornered on the issue.
In an exclusive interview Friday with TPM, Pelosi sketched out the Democrats' strategy for renewing (and possibly expanding) the payroll tax cut, which most economists say would promote job creation next year -- when persistent unemployment will be at the center of the election debate.
"It is really a stalling tactic," Pelosi said of recent reports that Republicans want to use the lapsing tax cut as leverage to pass key GOP priorities, including construction of a major oil pipeline from the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico, and rolling back Obama's health care law. "It's unworthy of the needs of the American people for them to go all around the mulberry bush with this stuff. If they want to do something for the American people -- to remove the uncertainty as to whether these payroll tax cuts will be extended, whether [unemployment insurance] will be extended ... let's just get about doing it."
"They know that this stuff isn't going to fly, that the President's not going to sign it -- so why are they doing this," Pelosi says. "It's about votes at the end of the day, and some of their people are never going to vote for anything, so they're going to need our votes, we're going to have to work together, and they're going to need the President's signature -- and they're going to need it to pass the Senate."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Liberals and environmentalists are rejoicing tonight over the Obama administration's decision to delay -- or in bureaucratese, "seek further review of" -- a proposal to build a massive pipeline from the Canadian Tar Sands to the gulf coast. But their celebration could be short lived.
Here's the full backstory. The so-called Keystone XL pipeline has become the frustrated environmental community's final litmus test for the President. Though the bureaucratic questions surrounding the project have to do with domestic health and safety concerns, environmentalists fear, with good reason, that the pipeline would assure the extraction of too much carbon for the climate to bear. So they've been hounding the White House and State Department for months in an effort to get the project scrapped altogether.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)For six days and counting now, hundreds of protesters have gathered outside the White House to demand President Obama intervene and stop the construction of an oil pipeline that will span the breadth of the United States -- from Montana to the Gulf of Mexico. Over 300 of them have been arrested -- and not just wild-eyed idealistic college students, but high-profile advocates including environmental leader Bill McKibben. Despite all this, the administration says this is a question for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
What the heck is this all about?
At issue isn't just NIMBYism or standard concerns about oil spills, but the question of whether the United States should accelerate an extraction process that some environmental experts say will lose the fight against global warming forever.
Two Congressional leadership aides -- one Democratic, one Republican -- confirmed elements of Wednesday night's big developments in high-stakes talks to increase the national borrowing limit.
President Obama and leaders on Capitol Hill have committed themselves to moving ahead with a larger deficit reduction deal than negotiators once thought possible in the weeks ahead. In sum, Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), along with other GOP and Dem leaders are now aiming for a 10-year goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction, which would include defined cuts in entitlement, defense, and domestic discretionary spending. The cuts would amount to about 75 percent of the overall savings, and the biggest question now is whether the GOP will truly give ground on taxes -- in specific ways, that produce real revenue. The alternative is that those changes will remain ill-defined in ways that fail to guarantee deficit reduction, and convince already-uneasy Democrats to throw up their hands.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)As expected, a Democratic bill that would have stripped big oil companies of multi-billion annual tax subsidies failed to overcome a Republican filibuster Tuesday evening. The heavily partisan 52-48 vote fell well short of the 60 required to achieve cloture. Three Democrats -- Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Mark Begich (D-AK), and Ben Nelson (D-NE) -- voted with Republicans to maintain the subsidies. Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Susan Collins (R-ME) voted with the Democrats.
Democrats have turned oil subsidies into a major issue as Congress looks at ways to tame high deficits and the national debt. They've been fueled in their efforts by soaring gas prices and extraordinary industry profits. And party leaders have vowed to include the tax breaks in any grand fiscal bargain tied to raising the debt limit.
But this effort was all about politics. Democrats want to highlight the GOP alignment with oil companies this election season and Tuesday's vote will help them do that. But if it had passed it would have run smack into a pretty big problem -- because, er, it was unconstitutional.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans may have a point that Democrats are playing politics with oil subsidies. To understand why, look no further than the fact that the bill Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will bring to the floor for a vote Tuesday evening doesn't pass basic constitutional muster.
"The question is if the bill passes the Senate, it will run into a blue-slip problem," Reid said at his weekly Capitol press conference. Blue slipping is the process the House uses to reject Senate bills that impact tax and spending.
Reid joked, "That's the least of my worries."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans senators who in the past have supported ending tax subsidies to big oil companies are prepared to vote Tuesday night with their party leadership to keep those subsidies in place.
"I'm going to vote with my party," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) during a Senate vote Tuesday afternoon. "I just think oil subsidies have to be part of a bigger package. If you had expanded drilling, I would consider reducing the subsidies or eliminating them if you got more drilling as part of the package.
"I'm leaning against it because it looks like it's political," said Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL).
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)What Mitt Romney's Health-Care Speech Needs To Say
Politico reports: "At the University of Michigan's Cardiovascular Center Romney will address the issue that haunts his candidacy: The health care bill he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts, legislation that President Obama's advisers say inspired ObamaCare. For Romney, there's no getting around it. The perceived similarities between the two measures are a deal-breaker for the Republican base, which loathes the president's plan. At the same time, the former governor can't afford to completely repudiate the centerpiece of his four-year-term without reinforcing the flip-flopping knock on him."
Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama will deliver remarks at the National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast at 9:30 a.m. ET. Obama and Vice President Biden will meet at 11 a.m. ET with the Senate Republican Caucus, and Obama and Biden will meet for lunch at 12:30 p.m. ET. Then at 1:50 p.m. ET, Obama and Biden will honor the National Association of Police Organizations Top Cops. Obama will meet at 2:30 p.m. ET with the Congressional Black Caucus. At 4 p.m. Et, Obama will be interviewed by Telemundo. At 4:25 p.m. ET, Obama will be interviewed by KINC Univision/Entravision Las Vegas, WLTV Univision 23 Miami and Telemundo Dallas.
Senate Democrats are pushing hard on ending tax breaks for oil companies, linking the issue to the deficit and high gas prices, which have boosted profits in the industry to new heights.
In a floor speech on Tuesday, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said the Senate would target $4 billion in benefits for oil companies with the intention of using the savings to help address the nation's growing debt.
"If we're serious about reducing the deficit, this is an easy place to start," Reid said. "It's a no-brainer. Let's use the savings from these taxpayer giveaways to drive down the deficit, not drive up oil company profits."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Republicans on Thursday unanimously voted down a motion from Democrats to consider legislation to end subsidies to oil companies.
Democrats sought to attach the measure, which failed in a 241-171 vote that saw seven Democrats defect, to a bill that would allow oil companies to more easily secure drilling permits off the Gulf Coast. That bill passed.
Speaker Boehner suggested in an interview with ABC last month that he was open to ending oil subsidies, prompting calls from the White House on down to quickly pass legislation doing so.
A number of Republicans, such as Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), have suggested that oil subsidies and other corporate tax breaks could be eliminated as part of a broader tax reform package but there has been less appetite for a standalone bill targeting the industry.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is following the White House's lead by seizing on the populist idea of ending subsidies for the five largest oil giants.
Reid said he would hold a vote as soon as possible on a bill to eliminate the tax breaks for the five largest oil companies, Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell and ConocoPhillips, which have reported record profits in recent weeks and months.
"We have to take away the subsidies for these five major oil companies," he told reporters on a conference call Wednesday. "There's no need for these subsidies. The companies have broken records [with their] profits."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
President Obama knows all too well what it's like to feel the wrath of rankling his base by embracing compromise with Republicans on one of their ideological positions. That's why he didn't hesitate when House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) appeared to open the door -- just a crack -- to the idea of ending payments to oil companies in an interview with ABC News released Monday afternoon.
Boehner's office spent all day dialing back the bosses' comments.
"We have pointed out for years that raising costs for energy producers will raise costs for consumers," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told TPM. "And we want to 'take a look' at anything that lowers gas prices - but the President's proposal won't do that."
But the damage was already done and the rest of the GOP leadership team was forced to quickly putty over any cracks appearing on the surface -- real or perceived -- while Obama did his best to exploit any divisions.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)President Obama didn't wait to take advantage of what looked to be a new Republican position on federal oil and gas subsidies. In a letter sent to Congressional leaders on Tuesday, Obama welcomed House Speaker John Boehner's apparent newfound appreciation for the call to end taxpayer payments to oil companies, expressed in an interview with ABC News on Monday night.
"I was heartened that Speaker Boehner yesterday expressed openness to eliminating these tax subsidies for the oil and gas industry," Obama wrote. "Our political system has for too long avoided and ignored this important step, and I hope we can come together in a bipartisan manner to get it done."
Not so fast, Boehner's office said.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) told ABC News on Monday that he would be open to reevaluating billions of dollars in subsidies to oil companies that have enjoyed strong support from the GOP.
"It's certainly something we should be looking at," Boehner said. "We're in a time when the federal government's short on revenues. They ought to be paying their fair share."
Democrats have relentlessly attacked Republicans in recent months for supporting tax breaks and subsidies aimed at oil companies, contrasting the corporate aid with GOP proposals to drastically reduce long-term funding for Medicare and Medicaid. Boehner's small -- but significant -- step back from the traditional Republican position is a clear indicator that he senses political vulnerability as gas prices soar.
In addition to his new line on subsidies, Boehner went out of his way to take a dig at oil companies' profits in the interview.
"Everybody wants to go after the oil companies and, frankly, they've got some part of this to blame," he said, discussing rising oil prices.
Boehner cautioned that he wasn't ready to abandon support for subsidies just yet, saying he wanted to make sure he first studied "what impact this is going have on job creation here in America."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)After the BP oil spill, Americans became increasingly wary of offshore drilling. Now, as Japan struggles to deal with an earthquake-damaged nuclear power plant, a new Pew poll shows a spike in opposition to nuclear power here in the U.S. -- while support for offshore drilling is making a comeback.
The two findings aren't necessarily related to each other, as support for offshore drilling began rising late last year. But the results suggest that, as was the case with the oil spill, an energy production disaster can quickly turn public opinion against that form of energy production.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The progressive group Americans United for Change will go live Wednesday with a new ad slamming Republicans for prioritizing subsidies for big oil corporations over federal education spending.
"There is a right way and a wrong way to get our country's fiscal house in order and Republicans have chosen the wrong path: corporate welfare over the well being of Americans and our children's education," says Tom McMahon, executive director of Americans United.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Obama Promotes Women's Equality
In this weekend's YouTube address, President Obama marked Women's History Month, and promoted his administration's work to achieve equality for women.
"Achieving equality and opportunity for women isn't just important to me as President," said Obama. "It's something I care about deeply as the father of two daughters who wants to see his girls grow up in a world where there are no limits to what they can achieve."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Check out this interview of Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) -- he of apologizing to BP fame -- by ABC on Wednesday. Pressed repeatedly by Jon Karl to stake out a position on tax credits enjoyed by offshore oil companies, Barton argued that the subsidies represent equal treatment, and are required to keep the companies like Exxon-Mobil from going out of business.
"Over time if you put so many disincentives against any U.S. manufacturing or production company, or oil and gas exploration company, they'll go out of business," Barton said.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Top Senate Democrats took a break from their annual retreat Thursday afternoon to criticize Republicans for going spending-cut crazy.
"The House Republican proposal is not responsible," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on a conference call with reporters.
Last week, Reid called the House Republicans' plan to slash $34 billion from current spending levels over the next six months "unworkable." Just today, under pressure from their right flank, GOP leaders increased that number to about $58 billion.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)The American Petroleum Institute, the industry association for the oil and natural gas companies, is out with a new statement responding to President Obama's State of the Union Address. And while their statement doesn't directly refer to Obama's pointed line, "So instead of subsidizing yesterday's energy, let's invest in tomorrow's," it's not exactly a friendly response, either.
"The American people spoke loud and clear in the last election and directed the President and new Congress to focus on one main issue-job creation. It's unfortunate that the administration seems poised to stifle what remains one of America's strongest job creating industries," says the statement from API president and CEO Jack Gerard.
Indeed, as the statement later adds, they're not really getting subsidized at all: "The U.S. oil and natural gas industry also pays taxes at effective rates far higher than most other industries, and does not receive payments from the government to support oil and gas development. The tax deductions it does receive are similar to those enjoyed by other industries to encourage energy production and new jobs. We need policies that help the 9.2 million hardworking men and women in the industry, not hurt them."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)In the rush to close up shop for August recess, the Senate had one of its most productive days in recent memory Thursday. In a matter of hours, they passed a state aid bill, confirmed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, confirmed dozens of other Obama nominees, including James Clapper as Director of National Intelligence, passed a border security bill, child nutrition legislation, and more.
Underneath all that, though, is a growing pile of initiatives that the Senate failed to take up. Here are the top items on the agenda the Senate didn't check off before adjourning.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Wither the stripped-down energy bill?
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had hoped to pass a scaled-back energy bill ahead of August recess. But with only a week left until break, a packed schedule and an expected Republican filibuster, that's not looking very likely.
Democrats and Republicans remain most heavily divided over a provision in the Democrats' legislation that would eliminate a cap on liability for oil companies in the event of an offshore spill -- something Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) last week called "an affront to those who are serious about enacting good policy."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Despite the demise of climate change legislation last week, top Republicans are loudly opposing a new, scaled back energy bill unveiled by Senate Democrats last night.
At a press conference this morning with top Republicans, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) called it a "cobbled-together bill," and GOP aides continue to raise the specter of a "national energy tax" despite the fact that the new legislation contains no tax on carbon emissions.
The Democratic plan, which is comprised of several measures (each of which has bipartisan support), may be in serious jeopardy, unless Democrats budge on one key issue: oil spill liability.
Last week, Louisiana Democratic Senate hopeful Charlie Melancon released an internal polling memo that showed that he had erased Republican David Vitter's double digit lead in their upcoming electoral showdown.
Internal data for that poll, conducted by Anzalone Liszt Research and obtained by TPMDC paints a picture of an electorate that still favors the GOP, but which increasingly mistrusts the incumbent Vitter in the wake of a recent scandal, and is now considering Melancon as a viable alternative.
Of 800 likely voters surveyed, 37 percent said they're likely to vote Democratic compared to 42 percent likely to vote Republican, and 20 percent undecided.
GOP Lawmakers Optimistic About 'No' Votes
The Washington Post reports that Congressional Republicans have become more comfortable with the "Party of No" label: "Republicans say polls suggest that they can oppose all of these initiatives by casting them into a broader critique of Democrats increasing the size of government and the budget deficit, even if their bills are individually popular with the public. 'We're very comfortable where we're at; we have very few members who feel endangered," said Rep. Tom Cole (Okla.), a veteran Republican and a deputy whip in the House. "We feel like we are reflecting a broader mood of dissatisfaction. Right now, the American people want us saying no.'"
Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama will receive the presidential daily briefing at 1:15 p.m. ET, will meet at 1:45 p.m. ET with senior advisers, and will receive the economic daily briefing at 2:45 p.m. ET. He will meet at 4 p.m. ET with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He will meet at 4:50 p.m. ET with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Rep. Jim Lagenvin (D-RI), and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI). He will deliver remarks at 6 p.m. ET, at an event to commemorate the 20th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The idea of granting supboena power to President Obama's oil spill inquiry commission has overwhelming support in the Congress. Just last week, the House voted 420 to 1 to do just that. The lone Republican to object was Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). But just yesterday, when Senate Democrats tried to make it official by unanimous consent, they hit a brick wall in the form of Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC).
DeMint objected, likely delaying the subpoena power for weeks. But he did so not because of his own objections, but was acting on behalf of "members of the Republican conference."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)Democrats are preparing to oppose the latest GOP plan to hold oil companies accountable for spill damages in the future.
A new plan, authored by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), and passed my way by a source, would give the President the authority to set liability caps, based on congressionally approved guidelines, on a spill-by-spill basis. The idea is that this legislation would replace the Democrats' bid to simply lift the liability cap, exposing companies to the full cost of their spills. An Inhofe spokesman says they want to work with Democrats on the GOP proposal and use it as a substitute when the Environment and Public Works committee meets to consider the Democratic plan tomorrow.
Democrats who support lifting the cap altogether say no way. They're preparing a list of objections to Inhofe's plan, highlighting the fact that it leaves the President -- and future, more oil-friendly Presidents -- tremendous discretion to set low liability caps, and that spill damages can not be predicted ahead of time.
We'll see how this pans out tomorrow when EPW meets to mark up the Democrats' bill. Dems seem to be trying to get out in front of this one, worried perhaps that some of their members might get thrown for a loop by the Inhofe plan.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)Now that House Republicans have concluded that Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) can keep his post as top GOPer on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Democrats are associating that decision with Republican members in contested districts, highlighting their complicity with party leadership and Barton himself.
"House Republicans like Representative Dave Reichert are keeping British Petroleum apologist Joe Barton as their top Republican on energy policy and continue to back his unbelievable obstruction to holding British Petroleum accountable for this disaster," reads a statement from DCCC spokesman Ryan Rudominer. "This is another outrageous example of Representative Reichert putting Big Oil, like British Petroleum, before American taxpayers. Voters will not tolerate Republicans like Reichert who want a British Petroleum apologist to lead their party's energy policy and their continuing efforts to block holding British Petroleum fully accountable."
If you're keeping track, Barton first apologized to BP CEO Tony Hayward over the government response to the oil spill, then apologized for his apology, then basically took back his apology, until his spokesman took responsibility for taking back the apology.
This push will be made in Reichert's Washington state district as well as the districts of the members below the fold, including GOP leadership.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)If more politicians were as forthright as Rep. Steven King (R-IA), Rush Limbaugh might have more friends in Congress these days. In fact, Republicans are so on-message with the idea that Joe Barton was wrong, and speaking for himself, when he apologized to BP CEO Tony Hayward that they're even willing to throw the conservative talk show host and noted GOP opinion-mover under the bus.
King says that's mostly for show. Republicans, he suspects, are publicly distancing themselves from Tony Haward apologist Joe Barton while privately acknowledging that he was right to accuse the White House of shaking down BP.
"I think there will be a few that, like me, will agree with JB's words, and his description, and there will be a lot of others that privately agree with what he said," King told TPMDC yesterday.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (1)NRCC chairman Pete Sessions, whose job it is to increase GOP ranks in the House, says Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) will likely retain his post as the top Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee. Asked last night after a House vote if Barton may face further repercussions for apologizing to BP CEO Tony Hayward, Sessions told reporters that Barton's already paid his penance.
"I don't think that's the direction we're headed in," Sessions said. "...I believe that Joe has adequately addressed the issue."
PERMALINK | COMMENTS | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (0)
