For those of you that missed it on CSPAN1 today, watch this and get an understanding of what just happened.
My own representative, Wally Herger had a few things to say also:
It is the most fired up I’ve ever seen him. In an email a couple of days ago to his chief of staff at our local office, I had described his floor speeches as being like a “churchmouse”.
I think he got the message.
UPDATE:
For those that want to read it, here is the bill and amendment. Warning: BIG FILES, long downloads.
Text of original bill:
http://www.eenews.net/public/25/11457/features/documents/2009/06/23/document_daily_03.pdf
Amendment Text:
http://www.rules.house.gov/111/SpecialRules/hr2998/waxman1_hr2998_111.pdf
A few months back, a senior Russian bureaucrat (actually, IIRC, it was the Vice-President) in an in-depth interview was firm in his stated opinion, that, as a result of the Obama victory and the polarization around it, the US was finished. That not only would the US fall rapidly in power and influence on the world stage, but by 2010 (or perhaps 2012, memory is weak) it would be deep in civil war. The interview at the time seemed laughable and farcical.
As a long time observer and neighbour watching the US especially closely during the last term of Bush, the treatment of Palin, and the machinations of the Democratic National Caucus, the national media and the administration of today, I fear the VP might well be correct. This vote may well portend that Americans may have to take their government back by force. I think you may have two, and only two opportunities to change the course of this: derail it in the senate, then sweep clean in 2010. 2012 is an eternity away in the life of a nation.
Sadly, my representative, Melissa Bean also voted for this bill. I have sent an email expressing my disappointment, displeasure and intent to campaign against her in the next election.
I wish I could hold out hope for contacting my senators. I happen to live in the “great” state of Illinois, represented by Dick Durbin and Roland Burris. It is a futile gesture to contact either one in any issue running counter to the administration, yet I will do so anyway.
From American Thinker,
Email Friend | Print Article | 71 Comments | Share Share
June 26, 2009
Cap-And-Tax Passes House Despite Last Ditch 300 Page Switch (Updated)
Marc Sheppard
The largest and most wasteful tax-hike in the history of this republic just passed the House by a vote of 219 to 212. And while 44 wise Democrats crossed party lines to vote against it, 8 Republicans actually forgave an unforgivable 3AM airdrop and voted for this abomination anyway, giving the numbskulls one more yea than they needed We’ll know their names, and perhaps their inducements, soon. (Update: Names and Phone Numbers at page Bottom)
The last minute chicanery was revealed to the public this morning on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal, when Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) announced that the Democrats had dropped a 300 page amendment into the cap-and-tax bill at 3AM this morning. The congressman had no idea what was contained within the eleventh hour changes, and assumed the bill would go to the floor with his fellow legislators equally ignorant. And the villains who crafted the last-ditch switch likely hit the sheets this morning anticipating a likewise uninformed vote.
But Minority leader John Boehner spent over an hour on the House floor this afternoon exposing the contents of the amendment. And he itemized its provisions for wealth realignment and government intervention into literally every miniscule aspect of American’s lives that are so implausible, so outrageous, so over-the-top insane, that it was hard to imagine that this bill – which was considered a toss-up all day – would have any chance of survival in a rational world.
Alas, we live in no such world.
It appears the Blue Dogs came through. The Yellow Skunks did not.
** Updated 6/26/09 10:20 PM EDT
Had just two of these RINO reptiles voted the will of their constituents, Washington would be whistling a different tune tonight. If any of them happen to slink about your district, don’t wait for Election Day to express your outrage:
Bono Mack, Mary (CA-45) 202-225-5330
Castle, Mike (DE) 202-225-4165
Kirk, Mark (IL-10) 202-225-4835
Lance, Leonard (NJ-7) 202-225-5361
LoBiondo, Frank (NJ-2) 202-225-6572
McHugh, John (NY-23) 202-225-4611
Reichert, Dave (WA-8) 202-225-7761
Smith, Chris (NJ-4) 202-225-3765
Herbert Hoover got that devastating Smoot-Hawley Bill enacted, and it managed to inflict a depression on the World’s economy, including our own. Barack Obama’s cap for pap may achieve the same result but in reverse, when the developing BRIC countries (Brazil, India, Russia, China, etc.), unburdened by a foolish and unnecessary stealth carbon tax, proceed to destroy our jobs. Will Congress then respond with a new Smoot-Hawley howler to curtail the flood of cheaper imports sure to follow? Or will cooler heads in the Senate prevail and dump cap for pap to avoid the unintendended consequence of inviting Depression II?
Mike Lorrey (18:06:27) Said:
Ha I clicked on the “offset your carbon emissions” ad below the video on the main page 30 times.
……………………………………………………………………..
Ha ! so did I, in fact at 3cents a click, isn’t it ? , I clicked 34 times so as it costs them at least a dollar ….. hahaha.
Lets all make it a point to do this every visit (if time allows) and Anthony can gain some revenue, whilst the carbon shills can pay his expenses. That’s IRONY !!!! Maybe if enough people click often enough, it may cause a DOS website crash, now we wouldn’t want that to happen would we ?
Guffaw 😀
Sen. Inhofe makes some very good points here:
Remember the Bill has yet to be given a timetable in the Senate, and Inhofe has previously stated that there isn’t a ghost of a chance of it being passed in the Senate, because there aren’t the required majority of votes to do so, under the rules. Sen. Boxer already knows this and has already conceded defeat we are told.
More from Inhofe @ur momisugly the 3rd NIPCC
http://tinyurl.com/inhofe-nipcc
So why then has the House wasted so much cash and time on this utter farce?
Here are the eight Republicans In Name Only (RINO) who betrayed they Country and generations of American’s yet unborn by voting YES on the Waxman-Markey energy tax bill.
Mary Bono Mack (CA45); California 45th District; http://bono.house.gov/;
Mike Castle (DE); Delaware; http://castle.house.gov/
Mark Steven Kirk (IL-10); Illinois 10th District; http://www.house.gov/kirk/
Frank A. LoBiondo (NJ-2); New Jersey 2nd District; http://www.house.gov/lobiondo/
Chris Smith (NJ-4); New Jersey 4th District; http://chrissmith.house.gov/
Leonard Lance (NJ-7); New Jersey 7th District ; http://lance.house.gov/
John M. McHugh (NY-23); New York 23rd District ; http://mchugh.house.gov/
Dave Reichert (WA-8); Washington 8th District; http://reichert.house.gov/
I am saddened to report that three of these eight traitors are in my own State of New Jersey. I will do everything in my power to make sure that they never hold elective office as Republicans in New Jersey again. If these three RINO’s and just one other RINO from another State had voted NO the bill would have been defeated. My message to all eight is save yourself and us a lot of time and effort and become Dummycrats now!
Michael Ronayne
Nutley, NJ
I skimmed through the 300 pages of amendments last night and posted my comments in my blog:
http://www.anupchurchchrestomathy.com/2009/06/last-minutes-amendments-to-waxman.html
You might enjoy the part about Location-Efficient Mortgages, which is near as
I can tell means you get help on your mortgage if you buy a house closer to work.
“Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
Barrack Obama – January 2008
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/11/03/obamas-energy-plan-bankupt-coal-power-plants-skyrocketing-electricity-rates/
[snip – let’s not go there please]
In response to the excellent comments and observations thus far I would add that when contacting our Senators it’s not enough to urge just a no-vote. It will be VERY important to insist upon a no-vote for any of the myriad ‘compromises’ that will come down the legislative pipeline.
A watered-down W-M is no better than that narrowly passed yesterday. It must be rejected in its totality or else we’re still firmly behind the eight-ball.
Here’s a summary that may interest readers.
15 Reasons to Oppose Climate Bill Courtesy – Club for Growth via Instapundit
Need a reason to oppose the Waxman-Markey “cap and tax” bill, which will be voted on in the House later this afternoon? Here are 15 reasons, provided by the good folks at the RSC. Democrats should find several of these reasons hard to ignore.
1. National Energy Tax: This is a tax that will affect constituents in every aspect of their lives. From transportation, to food, to electricity, to income – this is the ultimate regressive consumption tax to the tune of nearly $3,000 per year according to the Heritage Foundation. The costs per family for the whole energy tax aggregated from 2012 to 2035 are estimated to be $71,493.
2. Exacerbates the Economic Crisis: Studies from numerous independent research groups, including MIT, the Heritage Foundation, and CRA International, all agree that implementing a massive cap and tax scheme will cost millions of jobs, reduce earnings for the average U.S. worker, and devastate GDP.
3. Massive Job Losses: According to the Heritage Foundation, employment will be lower by 1,105,000 jobs per year. In some years, the national energy tax will reduce employment by nearly 2.5 million jobs.
4. Winners & Losers: The bill transfers wealth from rural areas to cities. States like California, Washington, and New Jersey would receive more emission credits than they need, enabling them to sell surplus credits to smaller facilities in states like Ohio that receive maybe half of the credits they need – making the rich, richer, and the poor, poorer.
5. Little Environmental Impact: The bill will cost consumers trillions of dollars, while reducing, by a very small amount the carbon dioxide that is contained in our atmosphere. World-wide emission reductions would be negligible without the full participation of all nations. Additionally, just because the government requires a certain decrease in emissions within a certain timeframe, does not mean such decreases can occur in that time period.
6. Green Jobs Are a Proven Failure: According to a recent study (PDF) that reviewed the impact of “green jobs” in Spain, the U.S. can expect 2.2 jobs to be destroyed for every 1 renewable job financed by the government. Only 1 in 10 of the jobs actually created through green investment is permanent, and since 2000, Spain has spent 753,778 U.S dollars to create each “green job,” including subsidies of more than $1,319,783 per wind industry job.
7. Free Money to Select Corporate Titans: Government-run “cap and trade” is, by definition, a central economic planning scheme in which the government decides which industries and companies deserve more or fewer credits and what business factors and economic outputs are “necessary.” Small business and rural interests never had a seat at the table when discussions occurred on how to craft H.R. 2454.
8. Creates a Derivatives Market for Companies like AIG: Companies like AIG and ENRON will be participating in a new derivatives market that is much more volatile than housing or natural gas. This new unregulated derivates market will be more perilous for companies like these than the traditional ones that got them into trouble in the first place. In addition, since the created artificial market contains no transparency, it is more likely to attract traders intent on imposing Ponzi schemes in the same spirit of Bernie Madoff and swindle thousands of Americans.
9. Devastates Rural America: According to the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, the monthly residential electricity bills in 25 states will increase 15 to 28 percent for every $20/ton of carbon dioxide allowances. Rural households spend 58% more on fuel than urban residents as a percentage of their income. The Heritage foundation estimates farm income will drop by $50 billion by 2035.
10. Concedes to the Competition: Currently, China accounts for 85% of global growth in coal each year and is the world’s largest annual emitter of greenhouse gases. China’s energy usage rose by 7.2% last year and they are building approximately two coal fired power plants per week to keep up with demand. Recently, at a U.N. conference, the Chinese government’s advisory panel on climate change asserted that the cap and tax targets were too low by stating Given that, it is natural for China to have some increase in its emissions, so it is not possible for China in that context to accept a binding or compulsory target. In addition, India will not agree to any cap on their total energy production, and many believe India will double their coal-fired-capacity by 2030.
11. Discriminates Against Developing Nations: The bill creates a new program under USAID to provide U.S. foreign aid to developing countries for their efforts to adapt to climate change. Essentially, the bill is sending taxpayer funds to encourage third world nations to not develop carbon emitting energy sources – keeping them at a competitive disadvantage from developed nations for even more decades to come.
12. Establishes an Unrealistic Renewable Energy Standard (RES): “Cap and tax” does not take into account the fact that additional hydropower, nuclear and advanced fossil coal power plants cannot be deployed quickly enough to meet expected growth in electricity demand while also dramatically reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Since renewable technology accounts for a small percentage of energy demand, consumers can expect not only higher rates, but more transmission problems during peak hours of demand. Additionally, the bill preempts at least 23 state renewable electricity standards.
13. Davis-Bacon: “Cap and tax” expands Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements to many provisions of the bill. This policy ahs been shown to increase public construction costs by anywhere from 5 to 38 percent above projected costs for the same project in the private sector.
14. Bloated Bureaucracy: The bill establishes a myriad of new federal agencies intertwined between at least 21established agencies with the mission of reallocating trillions of taxpayer dollars in a supposedly fair and efficient manor. According the U.S Chamber of Commerce (PDF), the bill will impose 397 new federal regulations that require traditional agency rulemakings.
15. Countless Federal Mandates: The bill imposes over a thousand mandates and even mandates efficiency requirements on electric appliances like Jacuzzis.
Even Greenpeace opposes it, that should say something.
The points above don’t even cover the 300 pages added at the last minute.
Another thing that can be done is to address the corporations that are getting behind this thing. In my case that would be Applied Materials, whose board chairman released this glowing endorsement of the legislation yesterday:
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS221000+26-Jun-2009+BW2009062627 June 2009
FWIW, here is the letter I am snail-mailing him (can’t get an e-mail address)
“Dear Mr. Splinter,
I am personally convinced that photovoltaic devices will be, long term, a major source of our energy, and that the photovoltaic industry is therefore due for major long-term growth. As a shareholder (albeit a small one) of Applied Materials, I obviously want to see profitability, both long and short term.
I must vigorously object, however, to your endorsement, evidently in the company’s name, of the American Climate and Energy Security Act. There are several reasons for this, but the most basic is that the act incorporates and is largely based on an untruth–that carbon dioxide is a ‘pollutant’ responsible for global warming. This is very far from being established. What has been established is that carbon dioxide is necessary for all photosynthetic plants, and that increased levels make plants grow faster. It is currently estimated that 16% of present world food production is due to recent increases in ambient CO2.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Christy-Schlesinger_debate_090211.pdf
Truth is one value, but there are others at risk in this act, particularly our economic freedom. The act enormously expands the power of the Federal government over almost every aspect of our lives. There is hardly anything we can do that does not currently depend at some point on chemical processes that produce CO2. So nothing is too small to be regulated by the feds.
Then there are the economic questions. The current experience of others, particularly Spain, strongly suggests that, while the program will generate a certain number of new jobs, the net effect will be job loss. This act will benefit some at the expense of others, and will open the door to corruption even wider than it already is. A resort to ad hominem argumentation is regrettable. Still, it is not entirely irrelevant to note that some who are pushing for this bill have an economic interest in the outcome. One of these is Al Gore’s Generation Investments. Alas, another is Applied Materials.
With all due respect, we should be taking the high road. Our future prospects are pretty good in their own right, without inflicting on our country the kind of collateral damage inherent in American Climate and Energy Security Act.”
I share the good Congressman’s dismay at having to plow through the massive amendment in a few minutes, and I am not in favor of this bill. I want to point out, however, that Boehner had no such reservations voting for the Patriot Act in 2001, legislation which could easily rival this bill for the epithet of “most profound in 100 years,” [nice hyperbole there – Voting RIghts Act, anyone?] and which neither he nor anyone else in Congress had read. Those of you cheering should note the double standard.
Don’t know what’s wrong with that Reuters link above. Anyone interested, try this one:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Applied-Materials-Applauds-bw-1315521242.html?x=0&.v=1&.pf=personal-finance&mod=pf-personal-finance
EvanJones….
I am old enough to remember Carter…and unfortunately I’m very concerned that Obama is far worse. Carter was just an ineffective bumbling weak spined idiot. Obama is an egotistical statist who wants to be on Rushmore. He can do far more damage
The thing I wonder is, are these Democrats really that ignorant of how an economy works or are they delibaretly trying to destroy our economy and way of life?
“Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.”
The ones who will suffer first and the most is the elderly on fixed incomes who can barely make it month to month now. It get’s well below zero for long periods of time, even during the day, in the winter in many Northern States of the US. Can anyone imagine the suffering of the elderly during that?
Has our President thought about that?
John Boehner tells it like it is, so does Lubos Motl.
I regard this as one of the best written comments on the Climate Bill.
Send out the word and make every American ashamed that this is happening in his country.
http://motls.blogspot.com/2009/06/mad-radical-leftists-wins-in-us-house.html
Too bad we didn’t put up and elect any candidates that think the way we do.
“If somebody wants to build a coal power plant they can it’s just that it will bankrupt them…”
See him say it for your self.
There are estimates that show electricity bills will double from Waxman-Markey.
Global Climate Chaos (18:57:14) : (B) displacement of human populations;
Yes, most certainly! Since this has passed the House, I’ve already asked my neighbors (who now own the land they were bidding on in South America) about the cost of a lease on a hectare or so. (They’ve been asking my level of interest…). I’ll also be taking to time to leverage my spouses EU / Commonwealth citizenship into the same for me (just to hold open all the emigration options that holds). I can claim the citizenship as a spouse.
Yup, certainly is causing population displacement…
Wyatt A (19:42:55) : My question is that should this pass the Senate, where do we put (what remains of ) our savings before the economy collapses? Precious metals? Oil?
Well, there are two broad ways of looking at it:
1) Invest in the winners (and avoid the losers).
2) Buy what the winners will want to buy.
The U.S.A. is a loser. (Sorry, it just is.) The E.U. is only marginally better (since they often pass laws they ignore for economic reasons, as noted above). Who wins? China, India, Russia, Brazil (and a gaggle of dinky countries that don’t have very large stock markets).
Of these, Russia is a bit problematic (too unpredictable politically and little respect for property rights) so it’s OK on a trade bases (i.e. days to weeks holdings of 10% or less of your capital and exit on any rumors of bad news) but not as an Investment (IMHO, of course). China is a bit better in that regard. They are nominally communists, but running full tilt toward capitalism and with a fairly strong adherence to property rights and the rule of law. India has a better legal / political framework, but a bit slower on the uptake for the whole competitive capitalism thing (but making good progress). Finally Brazil: They played with the Socialism Shiny Thing a few decades ago and got over it. They are growing like a weed and have reasonable property rights laws.
So my investment order is
1) Brazil
2) India
3) China
with about 25%, 10%, 5% at present and headed for higher levels of India and China. EWZ is the Brazil fund (broad spectrum of Brazil, heavy in oil, minerals and mining, steel, etc.). India has a half dozen funds, but EPI is one focused on earnings growth (while IIF IFN and INP are each a bit different bite at the same apple. IIF is a broad fund, IFN is a closed end fund so it can sell at a premium or discount to the contents, while INP holds “notes” like options and futures and is more volatile). EEM is a decent basket of the whole emerging markets with a mix of them. FXI holds 25 large Chinese companies and EWH is a fund focused Hong Kong.
I own EWZ, FXI, EWH, EPI and some selected specific stocks in each country (including TTM Tata Motors in India, FEED and HOGS that are pork production and feed companies in China, CZZ a Brazilian sugar and alcohol fuel maker and others from time to time. Of these, FEED and HOGS are the most speculative. TTM now owns the Jaguar and Land Rover brands, sold to them by Ford recently…) Oh, and I own some PBR, Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company. (And maybe one or two others I’ve forgotten … it’s early…)
So what will these folks buy? Resources, food, basic goods, energy.
So the common leverage on this is Australia, Canada, and Brazil.
Notice that Brazil is a “two fer” and is on both sides of the play…
In Australia, I mostly own IAF – a modestly thinly traded fund with a high dividend. It’s easier to buy into and sell out of EWA and I use it for shorter term trades as it is less likely to bounce all over when the market moves one way or the other… For Canada, I own a fair bit of Canadian energy companies. My favorites are SU Suncor, IMO Imperial Oil, and PCZ PetroCanada of which I own PCZ at the moment. I also own one of the Candadian rails, though I’ve forgotten if it was CP or CNI … I think it was CNI. (They both move more or less together). CCJ would likely also be good if nuclear takes off as a Uranium processor… EWC is a broad Canada basket.
I would not recommend directly trading oil and cold / metals unless you are practiced at it. They are volatile and fickle and hard to trade.
That’s my “first cut” and winners and losers. I also own a bit of Chile from time to time ( CH and SQM ) and a bit of some of the other folks who will win from this. SQM will mine all that Lithium for all those batteries…
O, and PCU Southern Copper (or FCX Freeport McMoran Copper and Gold) for all the wires this will take…
Should we get used to hearing about this:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28858971/
This is before the ‘electricity rates necessarily skyrocket’.
I probably ought to mention that it is inflection that makes things move, often very early. So EWP, the Spain fund, has moved up recently (one suspects in part due to the move away from damaging policies). So it’s not so important what the policies ARE as it is what direction they are CHANGING. So Australia and Spain are getting a clue and the USA is now clueless, move money from USA to the newly “with clue” … And Canada played with the Kyoto Shiny Thing, but now ignores it, direction of change is away from Kyoto…
per Global Climate Chaos (18:57:14) :
“Section 701 reads:
`(a) Findings- The Congress finds as follows:
`(1) Global warming poses a significant threat to the national security, economy, public health and welfare, and environment of the United States, as well as of other nations.”
Threat to our national security?!
That’s astonishing language. What executive powers does the POTUS have under those circumstances?