The cool thing in the energy bill is the part that extends daylight savings time by 2 months.

There's not much in the bill that'd solve the problem of importing 12 million barrels of oil a day, though. Bring ANWR online, sure; why not? Every little bit helps. But I'm not sure a solution for the energy crisis is going to come from our government.

We need a public uprising and demand for more efficient vehicles. To modify a line from Field of Dreams:

If you demand them, they will get built.

The D behind their names doesn't denote a Democrat...their D is for Dipshits.

Does anyone know the number of the bill, you know HR_? I want to check on my Congressman, Duncan (R) TN

Increasing the supply is imposible. There's nothing positive in the bill. All it does is increase usage. More simple minded stuff by simple minded bastards pandering to idiots.

HR 6

What a system! Now if we could only export it to the Middle East.

Thanks Steve.

Of course my guy voted for it. I'll be calling his office to ask why there was nothing in it to require conservation, such as better gas milage.

God I want to live in a blue state. TN sucks (except for the weather and my husband's job. Oh well, I just keep plugging along)

I'd be willing to wager that Ms. Jackson-Lee will give an actual explanation, like it or not. I suspect that local politics might have something to do with it.

I forgot to tell you that the one good thing, and I mean really good, my Congressman has done was to vote against the war on Iraq. I just read a statement he made on 4/13/2005 on the house floor. It's about the war and it is great. I'm going to try to make a link but this is the page
Please read it and tell me how I can get the word out locally etc. I feel he keeps too low a profile on this.

This is the speech:http://www.house.gov/duncan/2005/fs041305.htm

Steve,
How did the Republicans from SoCal vote on this bill? Coupled with the DeLay mess, this could be potentially explosive in SoCal.

I can understnad the Republicans voting for this shit, but 22 democrats? Seriously, it's votes like this that make me think there has to be a complete overhaul of the party.

Happy Earth Day. (??!!)

There was language in the bill requiring higher fuel economy standards, but it was pulled out. We need to hold those who pulled out this language accountable. There is no rational explanation for not having conservation and improved fuel economy language in an Energy Bill.

Hey Detroit -- WAKE UP! Toyota and Honda are going to continue to eat your lunch if you do not start producing fuel efficient cars (can you say hybrids). And don't give me that Ford Escape Hybrid crap, it only gets 35MPH.

muckdog, but I remember Gail Norton saying oil wont flow down an Alaskan pipeline for 7 to 10 years. So short term it doesnt do anything. And even then, the oil probably will be sold internationally.

What I can't believe is that Congressional Democrats haven't grasped the concept that it is essential that they stand together and oppose EVERY single fucking thing that the GOP proposes.

Oy. Good to see this blog getting back to its progressive roots again.

"Why do any of these folks have D's next to their names?"

Because they live in a world full of all kinds of practical realities, some of which may even border on immoral or criminal conduct. Because unlike you, the rest of the world hopes that these D's will do better than the R's some of the time or most of the time. What the rest of the world doesn't expect is that they will be pure all of the time, because the only people who are like that are ideological absolutists, like the left-wing evangelicals on this blog.

If there was ever a clear sign that this blog is first and foremost about INtolerance, it's the repeat claims by you that a bad vote on one issue, or even several issues, warrants explusion from a party that you don't even belong to or support. You never allow, even theoretically, that the political realities of these D's constituencies and districts may compel these votes, but instead simply view them as acts of cowardice and failure, giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

I don't know if you ever had any credibilty, but you don't have it now. What you have is faint power derived entirely from your ability to demonize and project fear, which strikes me as no different from what the crazies on the right are doing. Congraultions, you're the new Tom Delay.

Penne, aside from the attacks on me, which if they make you feel good, go for it, how do you justify any Democrat voting with DeLay on MTBE?

"how do you justify any Democrat voting with DeLay on MTBE?"

How do you justify pandering to the readership of this blog? I know you're smarter than this, which means you're being - and I hate this term - intellectually dishonest.

Take the above sentence for example. It presupposes that I have to justify individual votes, and denies the inherent truths of our currently constituted and woefully flawed two-part system. Money talks, Steve, and EVERYBODY knows that. It talks on both sides of the aisle, and you know that if the Progressive Party was suddenly one of the two major players in this country that you'd see the same kinds of votes over and over again from members of that group - and more so the longer that party remained viable.

But let's take it as a given that I have to justify the votes. Your next bit of red meat to the left-wing nuts is implying that this was a vote for Delay, while denying that local politics - as DuckmanGR (if that is his real name) noted in this same thread - "might have something to do with it."

Not all votes serve only one master. George Bush has made a career out of opposing issues, and then, when he sees they're going to pass, supporting them and claiming them as his own. Does that mean everyone who voted on the Dem side for the Homeland Defense Bill 'voted with George Bush'?

Granted, this bill is a steal and a crime, but just because you and I hate Delay and would like a front row seat the day his head explodes, that doesn't mean Dems who voted for this bill voted for it because of Delay, to support Delay, or without deep misgivings.

Shades of gray, Steve. They're out there, but this blog never seems to see them. And because of that, this blog - which could be a rallying point for effective left-wing pressure on the Democratic Party - is instead just another online grouse-fest.

penne,

You seem to be saying that Steve should not be coming down hard on these Dems because they may have voted for the bill because of big business money. And that's ok?

Penne, then I'll rephrase it so that, to you, I'm not pandering: how do you justify a vote against local communities and their taxpayers in favor of a chemical company give-away?

I'm simply asking why I shouldn't be offended at seeing Democrats engage in behavior that we routinely browbeat the GOP for engaging in every day. Is it your contention that I should shut up and hold Democrats to a different standard?

How could this blog be a "rallying point for effective left-wing pressure on the Democratic Party" while ignoring stuff like this?

Target number one for 2006 primaries: Henry Cuellar (TX) has been on the wrong side of just about every issue for the past two years. Time for new blood.

So I guess penne's stance is that we shouldn't link this to DeLay although he has been at the forefront of pushing this moves liability legislation and contamination cleanup away from MTBE makers...oh lookee here what's this.

One of the biggest MTBE makers, Lyondell Chemical, is based in Houston- also DeLay's district- and gave DeLay $16,000 in campaign contributions in the 2003-04 election cycle, while another MTBE maker, Valero Energy, also based in Texas, gave DeLay $10,000 in that cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

No instead perhaps Steve should say Democrats vote AGAINST Safe Drinking water for their constituents and Americans in Support of Petrochemical Businesses who are financial supporters of the unethical Republican Tom DeLay.

"how do you justify a vote against local communities and their taxpayers in favor of a chemical company give-away?"

If I'm a politician I'm doing all sorts of calculations, including how much money those companies bring into my district/region, how many jobs they represent, etc. Do I know they're killing people? Sure. But so are traffic lights and cars and fuel standards and cigarettes and alchohol.

Yeah, somewhere you have to draw the line, but here that line is absolute, whereas in the real world, if you're trying to get elected and stay elected in order to do Good Things in other areas, you may have to deal with squiggly lines that change all the time and end up in alwful places you never even wanted to go.

Do I like the fact that any Dems have voted for the bills you've been railing against? No, I don't. But where those lines are isn't determined by the Dems, it's determined by a small faction of insane anti-American nuts in the Republican Party, and until we get that part out of power they're going to determine where these lines are.

I honestly do not think that most of these bills would have ever seen the light of day if Dems had been in control of Congress at the time, so that should be the goal: getting Dems in the majority. But here at the Progressive Feel Good Institute that's not the goal. The goal here is bitching about details while the big picture is largely ignored.

"I'm simply asking why I shouldn't be offended at seeing Democrats engage in behavior that we routinely browbeat the GOP for engaging in every day."

Again, this is a very broad point. Here are two ways to read it.

First, of course you're right to be pissed. The entire system is corrupt.

Second, because we already know the entire system is corrupt, we have to figure out what we can get done within that system, with the most important goal being party control of Congress. Everything else is meaningless until that happens.

"Is it your contention that I should shut up and hold Democrats to a different standard?"

Absolutely not. My point all along has been that you need to hold Dems to the SAME standard. Right now the far left in this country is holding Dems to an absolutist standard, and that's not helping. It makes it harder for Dems to appeal to the middle, it makes it harder for Dems to work across the aisle, and it makes it harder for Dems to know who their enemies are.

"How could this blog be a 'rallying point for effective left-wing pressure on the Democratic Party' while ignoring stuff like this?"

1. Stop threatening to destroy every individual Dem who votes against progressive interests on specific bills.

2. Pick something - anything! - as a point of focus and bear down on it. I think embracing energy as a cause is perfectly positioned right now, but not as an environmental or green issue. I think it's perfectly positioned as a national security issue, and if the left piled on that perspective it could do tremendous good - including help clean up the environment.

3. Find progressive-friendly candidates that you think can 'cross over' and appeal to mainstream Americans and average voters. Can we all agree yet that Ralph Nader is out of his freaking mind? Because that's what everybody else thinks in this country, and yet he's still the poster child for third-party candidates.

Anybody can bitch. Getting something done, particularly in the current political climate, takes guts. Getting anything good done takes discipline, guile, and a willingness to get your hands dirty in the grime that is American politlics.

11 of the 14 Dems. who voted to protect the makers of MTBE come from the oil patch. The Dems. from AL, HA and IL should explain their vote.

Soto's Ideological Purity Question of the Day:

Why do any of these folks have D's next to their names?

In Jackson-Lee's case, it's because she uses race to get what she wants and because she basically hates her country. Why else would someone call himself a democrat?

Or, the left could decide that education is a cricital issue, and thereby help prevent morons like Toby Pretzel from being produced.

Thanks Penne for the post; I was having trouble formulating even an R-rated response to the pea-brain with a computer.

Sounds like Toby has drunk some MTBE contaminated groundwater.

penne's right. too much bitching about everything, never any fresh ideas. also maybe these people that vote against YOUR bills are not all way out their in left field. why is one thing or your name is going on the blacklist? HUAC and McCarthy would be proud of you.

penne's right. too much bitching about everything, never any fresh ideas. also maybe these people that vote against YOUR bills are not all way out their in left field. why is one thing or your name is going on the blacklist? HUAC and McCarthy would be proud of you.

And what are your answers? Trust Cheney's secret Energy plan and don't ask questions?

rlprather, too much of the drink again, but could you weigh in? i beat Sheila up about all this, sending emails and all, but you know the result.

meme,

I used to live in Charlotte and Mel Watt was my congressman. I happily voted for him then and would still do so if possible. As leader of the Congressional Black Caucus he clearly has his work cut out for him. Looking at the overall
breakdown of the votes it troubles me that so many black Democrats from completely safe districts vote the way they do. Have they forgotten where they came from? It could be that they feel that with their safe seats that they are no longer accountable to their constituants. Or less cynically they may just sympathize with the lobbyists they see everyday.

Do people really want this energy bill passed?
There seems to be a perception that because of the outcome of the last election that Americans want the Bush agenda passed. We have seen through the polls on the peoposed phase out of social security and other issues that the truth is elsewhere. Part of getting the truth out may just be a matter of time. If Bush's second term continues to implode the chance to reverse the excesses of this (mis)administration will be better.

The optimist within me is beginning to feel that in the long run it is better to have Bush faced with the outcomes of his first term rather than having Kerry reap that whirlwind and likely end up as a one term president like Carter and likely be followed by someone like Jeb. If the Bushites lose seats in 2006, hopefully enough to swing one or both houses, it will bode well for bringing about a true paradigm changing election in 2008. We're going to need a strong showing in '06 and '08 to give the next president the votes needed to pick up the pieces post-Bush.

What is MTBE and whay is it added to gasoline? And what difference does it make whether MTBE Gas, or Regular Gas leaks into the ground water? The water is still contaminated! Won't drinking it kill you just the same?