Connect with us


They Said It! Dems on Record Supporting The McConnell EPA Amendment



Joe Manchin

Image via Wikipedia

SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “I Believe There’ll Be 13 To 15 Democrats That Will Vote For” The McConnell EPA Amendment

SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “I Believe There’ll Be 13 To 15 Democrats That Will Vote For It,” “I’m Working On Them I Can Tell You… I Think They’re Going To Vote For It, I Really Do.”

  • Q: “You signed onto the McConnell Amendment as a Democrat, but you’re the only Democrat I think who’s signed on to the McConnell Amendment.  Why can’t you get – you’re a persuasive person, you wear people down – why can’t you get other Democrats to sign onto the McConnell amendment?” SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “Well, I’m working on them I can tell you that from the standpoint – and I don’t know whether they don’t realize, I think a few more votes – I think they’re going to vote for it, I really do.  Now I guess they don’t want to take the lead on something that I feel so strongly about. I just believe that the EPA has totally overstepped its boundaries.  It was never an agency put in a position to the create public policy that’s going to affect us and change our way of life, I truly believe. So I feel strong enough to sign on. Other people might not, but I believe there’ll be 13 to 15 Democrats that will vote for it.” (Metro News’ “Hoppy Kercheval Show,” 4/1/11)

SEN. MITCH McCONNELL (R-KY): “Our Amendment Would Assure Small Businesses Across The Country That They Won’t Be Hit With Yet Another Costly New Job-Stifling Burden By Democrats In Washington. It will give voters the assurance that a regulation of this kind, which would have a dramatic impact on so many, could not be approved without their elected representatives standing up and voting for it. And, at a time of rising energy prices, it would prevent Democrats in Washington from adding even more pressure to energy prices than they already have out of fealty to special interests that would rather we buy our energy from overseas than find and use the bountiful resources that we already have here at home.” (Sen. McConnell, “McConnell EPA Amendment Would Foster Economic Growth And Job Creation,” 3/29/11)

WHERE THEY STAND: Fifteen Democrats On The EPA’s Job Destroying Plan

Dem Senator: EPA’s Actions ‘Jeopardize Thousands Of Jobs’


SEN. MAX BAUCUS (D-MT) On The EPA Regulating CO2: “I Do Not Want The EPA Writing Those Regulations.” “One issue discussed was Environmental Protection Agency’s role in greenhouse gas regulations. Baucus noted, ‘I mentioned that I do not want the EPA writing those regulations. I think it’s too much power in the hands of one single agency, but rather climate change should be a matter that’s essentially left to the Congress.’” (“Baucus Meets With Energy Distributors In Great Falls,” KRTV.Com, 10/5/10; Video Here)

SEN. BEN NELSON (D-NE): “Controlling The Levels Of Carbon Emissions Is The Job Of Congress. We Don’t Need EPA Looking Over Congress’ Shoulder Telling Us We’re Not Moving Fast Enough … Because EPA regulations would be a government-directed command-and-control regime, they would raise the price of energy in Nebraska, add greatly to administrative costs, and create new layers of bureaucracy. The burden would fall squarely on Nebraska families, farmers and businesses.” (“Nelson Cosponsors Resolution To Fight EPA Overreach,” McCook Daily Gazette, 1/22/10)


SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA): “The Fact Remains That Allowing The EPA To Make An End Run Around Congress And Twist The Clean Air Act For This Purpose Would Result In Ever-Changing Regulations And Uncertainty In The Private Investment Market That Would Damage Louisiana’s Already Fragile Economy And Fail To Address The Risks Of Climate Change.” (Sen. Landrieu, Press Release, 6/10/10)


SEN. DEBBIE STABENOW (D-MI): “I Don’t Want To See EPA Move Ahead On Its Own.” (“White House Steps Up Effort To Kill Murkowski Resolution,” National Journal, 6/10/10)


SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): “…I Firmly Believe That Congress, And Not The EPA, Should Determine Policy On Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” (Sen. Pryor, Statement, 6/11/10)


“Senator Jim Webb Today Joined Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-W.VA), Claire McCaskill (D-MO), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.), Ben Nelson (D-NE) And Kent Conrad (D-ND) In Introducing Legislation To Suspend Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regulation Of Greenhouse Gases From Stationary Sources For Two Years.” (Sen. Webb, Press Release, 1/31/11)



  • SEN. JOE MANCHIN (D-WV): “No Bureaucratic Agency Should Be Able To Regulate What Has Not Been Legislated, Especially When Their Actions Jeopardize Thousands Of Jobs … In the worst economy in generations, the EPA is undermining our fragile economy and has been an adversary instead of a partner on energy issues. It is time to reevaluate the agency’s use of its authority. I will work hard to make sure the EPA cannot overstep its authority, even as we develop a balanced approach to meeting our energy needs – including using clean coal and natural gas – and end our dependence on foreign oil.” (Sen. Manchin, Press Release, 1/31/11)


  • SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER (D-WV): “Now Is The Time To Encourage Companies To Invest In New Technologies And Create Jobs, And We Need A System That Gives Major Employers The Framework To Do So And To Succeed.  Many Of Us Agree That Congress, Not The EPA, Must Be The Decision-Maker On Such A Challenging Issue.” (Sen. Manchin, Press Release, 1/31/11)

  • SEN. JIM WEBB (D-VA): “I Had The Same Set Of Concerns With This Present Administration, Particularly As It Goes To Their Climate Area And Environmental Policies. … Unfortunately There Are People Who Simply Want To Do Away With Coal. Most Of Them Don’t Live Down Here.” (“Coal At Center Of Rules Debate,” Roanoke Times, 2/6/11)

SENS. ROCKEFELLER, BEGICH, BROWN (OH), LEVIN, CASEY, MCCASKILL, & BAUCUS: “Dear Administrator Jackson: We Write With Serious Economic And Energy Security Concerns Relating To The Potential Regulation Of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) From Stationary Sources Under The Clean Air Act. … We Strongly Believe This Is Ultimately Congress’ Responsibility…” (Sens. Rockefeller, Begich, Brown (OH), Levin, Casey, Byrd, McCaskill, & Baucus, Letter To EPA Administrator Jackson, 2/19/10)

  • “Eight Democratic Senators… Are Challenging The Environmental Protection Agency’s Authority To Regulate Pollution Blamed For Global Warming.” “Eight Democratic senators, including Mark Begich of Alaska, are challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate pollution blamed for global warming. In a letter written by Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the lawmakers said the agency lacks the power to restrict greenhouse gases from stationary sources such as power plants, factories and mines. The lawmakers said Congress — not the EPA — should address an issue with big implications for thousands of U.S. jobs and businesses. Opposition to EPA regulations by Democrats could pose a serious blow to the Obama administration’s effort to restrict heat-trapping greenhouse gases. While the administration is still pushing for Congress to pass a comprehensive climate bill this year, officials have not ruled out controlling greenhouse gases through regulation. The letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson was signed by Begich, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Carl Levin of Michigan and Max Baucus of Montana.” (“Begich Joins 8 Democrats In Opposing EPA Powers,” AP, 2/22/10)


“Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) Is Urging The White House To Re-Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Permitting Regulations To Avoid Damaging Manufacturers And Other Industries That Are Vital To His State And The Nationwide Economy. Brown — who faces reelection in 2012 in the battleground Midwest state — wrote to President Obama Monday calling for a review of the ‘economic repercussions and potential unintended consequences’ of regulations the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has begun to phase in this year.’” (“Fearing Economic Impact, Dem Presses Obama To ‘Reevaluate’ Climate Rules,” The Hill’s “E2 Wire” Blog, 2/28/11)


·         “‘In Ohio And Across The Country … Industries, Workers And Farmers Are Extremely Concerned That Burdensome Permitting Requirements Have Been Triggered For Greenhouse Gas Emissions. They need assurances that greenhouse gas reductions will be achieved in ways that protect and enhance our nations competitiveness and guard against the threat of carbon leakage — whereby both pollution and jobs in trade sensitive industries are shifted overseas,’ the letter to Obama says.” (“Fearing Economic Impact, Dem Presses Obama To ‘Reevaluate’ Climate Rules,” The Hill’s “E2 Wire” Blog, 2/28/11)

Continue Reading


Wealth is not Created at the Top: It is Only Devoured There



The UK has left the EU and we can argue about the minutiae of Wealth until we’re blue in the face. But the overriding factors are apparent and in one of the richest countries in the world it is shocking that so many people can’t even be sure if they are going to be able to eat enough today or provide for their loved ones.

These days, politicians from the left to the right assume that most wealth is created at the top. By the visionaries, by the job creators, and by the people who have “made it”. By the go-getters oozing talent and entrepreneurial-ism that are helping to advance the whole world – Opinion by 


… across the spectrum virtually all agree that wealth is created primarily at the top and so entrenched is this assumption that it’s even embedded in our language. When economists talk about “productivity”, what they really mean is the size of your paycheck. And when we use terms like “welfare state”, “redistribution” and “solidarity”, we’re implicitly subscribing to the view that there are two strata: the makers and the takers, the producers and the couch potatoes, the hardworking citizens – and everybody else.

Bankers, pharmaceutical giants, Google, Facebook … a new breed of  rentiers are at the very top of the pyramid and they’re sucking the rest of us dry


In reality, it is precisely the other way around. In reality, it is the waste collectors, the nurses, and the cleaners whose shoulders are supporting the apex of the pyramid. They are the true mechanism of social solidarity. Meanwhile, a growing share of those we hail as “successful” and “innovative” are earning their wealth at the expense of others. The people getting the biggest handouts are not down around the bottom, but at the very top. Yet their perilous dependence on others goes unseen. Almost no one talks about it. Even for politicians on the left, it’s a non-issue.

To understand why, we need to recognise that there are two ways of making money. The first is what most of us do: work. That means tapping into our knowledge and know-how (our “human capital” in economic terms) to create something new, whether that’s a takeout app, a wedding cake, a stylish updo, or a perfectly poured pint. To work is to create. Ergo, to work is to create new wealth.


But there is also a second way to make money. That’s the rentier way: by leveraging control over something that already exists, such as land, knowledge, or money, to increase your wealth. You produce nothing, yet profit nonetheless. By definition, the rentier makes his living at others’ expense, using his power to claim economic benefit.

But here comes the rub. Most rentiers are not as easily identified as the greedy banker or manager. Many are disguised. On the face of it, they look like industrious folks, because for part of the time they really are doing something worthwhile. Precisely that makes us overlook their massive rent-seeking…


The problems we face are that the politicians are firmly in the hands (pockets) of the uber wealthy. We live in a corporate plutocracy and those holding all the wealth and therefore power have no intention of changing the status quo, even if it isn’t sustainable. They remind me of bacteria (or cancer) devouring the host body more and more even though eventually it will kill them too.

Continue Reading


Donald Trump Forgets Important Lesson From Grandad:




Harper’s Magazine reprints an interesting letter from US President Donald J. Trump’s own grandfather that may get you thinking. Here is it then:

The Emigrants – By Friedrich Trump – From a letter written in 1905 by Friedrich Trump, Donald Trump’s grandfather, to Luitpold, prince regent of Bavaria. Trump had been ordered to leave Bavaria for failing to complete mandatory military service and to register his initial emigration to the United States twenty years earlier.


Prince Luitpold rejected Trump’s request for repatriation; the family later settled in New York. Translated from the German by Austen Hinkley.

Most Serene, Most Powerful Prince Regent! Most Gracious Regent and Lord!

I was born in Kallstadt on March 14, 1869. My parents were honest, plain, pious vineyard workers. They strictly held me to everything good — to diligence and piety, to regular attendance in school and church, to absolute obedience toward the high authority.

After my confirmation, in 1882, I apprenticed to become a barber. I emigrated in 1885, in my sixteenth year. In America I carried on my business with diligence, discretion, and prudence. God’s blessing was with me, and I became rich. I obtained American citizenship in 1892. In 1902 I met my current wife. Sadly, she could not tolerate the climate in New York, and I went with my dear family back to Kallstadt.

The town was glad to have received a capable and productive citizen. My old mother was happy to see her son, her dear daughter-in-law, and her granddaughter around her; she knows now that I will take care of her in her old age.

But we were confronted all at once, as if by a lightning strike from fair skies, with the news that the High Royal State Ministry had decided that we must leave our residence in the Kingdom of Bavaria. We were paralyzed with fright; our happy family life was tarnished. My wife has been overcome by anxiety, and my lovely child has become sick.

Why should we be deported? This is very, very hard for a family. What will our fellow citizens think if honest subjects are faced with such a decree — not to mention the great material losses it would incur. I would like to become a Bavarian citizen again.

In this urgent situation I have no other recourse than to turn to our adored, noble, wise, and just sovereign lord, our exalted ruler His Royal Highness, highest of all, who has already dried so many tears, who has ruled so beneficially and justly and wisely and softly and is warmly and deeply loved, with the most humble request that the highest of all will himself in mercy deign to allow the applicant to stay in the most gracious Kingdom of Bavaria.

Your most humble and obedient,

Friedrich Trump

… Well then. Long ago, yes.. Still applies? You tell me.

Continue Reading