PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues Pelosi tells Dems in close races to back drilling


markk
08-05-2008, 09:26 AM
Pelosi: At-risk Dems back drilling
By MARTIN KADY II & PATRICK O'CONNOR | 8/5/08 4:49 AM EST

California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle.

But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.

Pelosi’s gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.

“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies,” said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. “I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection.”

It’s a reality that Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-W.Va.) personally delivered to President Bush recently.

Rahall spent more than an hour last week talking to the president about energy. Bush spent the entire flight aboard Air Force One, and much of a subsequent limousine ride, grilling the West Virginia Democrat about legislative solutions to the high price of gasoline, Rahall said last week.

So, does the president think Congress can get anything done this year?

“No,” Rahall replied in a short interview with Politico. “He’s realistic about it.”

Asked if Congress will produce a comprehensive energy bill in September before Congress adjourns again for elections, Rahall replied, “This year? No.”

Instead, the chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources believes Democrats are all about 2009.

“We’ve laid the groundwork this year,” Rahall said.

Democratic House aides say the energy agenda has been carefully gamed out in strategy sessions, and Pelosi always intended to take heat on gas prices while tacitly encouraging more vulnerable Democrats to publicly disagree with her and show their independence.

Freshman Democrats like Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania and Don Cazayoux of Louisiana have taken her up on the offer.

Altmire has said a drilling vote “will happen,” while Cazayoux, hoping to hang on to his seat in a conservative Baton Rouge-area district, on Friday sent a letter to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) demanding a vote on more domestic oil exploration.

“There will be a vote,” said Altmire, who faces a rematch with former GOP Rep. Melissa Hart this fall in the Pittsburgh suburbs.

Indeed, Congress must vote before Sept. 30 to renew the annual moratorium; otherwise, it will lapse on its own, giving states the right to decide whether private companies can search for potential drilling sites three miles offshore. .

“My view is that if we have a vote, let’s make it a rational policy,” said Altmire, whose district includes viable coal and nuclear industries. “We can’t let Republicans hold this issue hostage because of one vote.”

Cazayoux, in his letter, says “the current debate seems to be bogged down in partisan one-upmanship.”

To some extent, House Republicans seem to be playing right along with the strategy, taking Pelosi’s name in vain dozens of times during their rebel House sessions over the past few days and making her the villain who won’t allow oil drilling votes.

“It’s grossly unfair to the Democrats who want a vote,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). “[Pelosi] needs to cut that out.”

The Senate has also gone with a run-out-the-clock strategy, with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) calling for a bipartisan energy summit but promising no major energy votes. Reid embraced the drilling and conservation proposals of the bipartisan Senate “Gang of 10” last week, but he made further commitment on the energy debate.

Reid, like Pelosi, is expecting to have a much stronger governing majority in the Senate next year, so he has little incentive to give in to Republicans on energy policy as long as he thinks it won’t hurt Democrats.

Even as they face heat from constituents during the August break, Democrats say they aren’t going to cave in to popular pressure.

“We feel pretty comfortable with where we are,” said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.), who is close to the Democratic leadership. “This is a not a new issue. This just didn’t happen today. We’ve been working on this for months.”

Democratic insiders said that Pelosi and other party leaders were “not rattled” by the GOP floor rebellion, and at this point, it’s not clear if the Democrats will even pay a price on energy. State-level polling conducted by Democrats suggests that voters still view President Bush and the GOP as the incumbent power in Washington, and Democratic strategists believe any anti-incumbent wave would hurt Republicans more than Democrats.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, one of the leaders of the rogue GOP House session, said he realizes that Democrats are “in a four-corners stall right now,” and admits that “it gets more challenging” for Republicans if they lose more seats in Congress.

Democrats are also comforted somewhat by the fact that crude oil prices have gone down more than 10 percent from their summer highs, and if the U.S. economy enters a recession, prices may fall further due to slackening demand.

“There is no crisis on our side of the aisle,” a top House Democratic leadership aide said. “We have a plan, and we will stick to it.”

John Bresnahan and Daniel Reilly contributed to this story



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12304_Page2.html

chiefforlife
08-05-2008, 09:34 AM
This is complete Bullsht! Its obviously not as important to her as she makes it out to be. "There is no way we are for drilling, unless you are going to lose an election, then support it."

Its about time the democrats come around, to bad its a few months behind the Republicans.

HonestChieffan
08-05-2008, 09:34 AM
Term Limits. When they use the entire country as a pawn in a game they play, we lose. Shameful behavior on all sides at all levels.

StcChief
08-05-2008, 09:35 AM
Cali should give her the boot.

Friendo
08-05-2008, 09:38 AM
Cali should give her the boot.

I'm a Dem and I agree.

markk
08-05-2008, 09:55 AM
Cali should give her the boot.

Too bad they never will since they are brainwashed to check the donkey box.

mlyonsd
08-05-2008, 10:03 AM
If Bush doesn't call Congress back into special session for an energy showdown so the democrats are forced to face the public he should be impeached. :eek:

markk
08-05-2008, 10:10 AM
If Bush doesn't call Congress back into special session for an energy showdown so the democrats are forced to face the public he should be impeached. :eek:

I don't know the rules, but isn't he expected to do that soon?

mlyonsd
08-05-2008, 10:14 AM
I don't know the rules, but isn't he expected to do that soon?

As of yesterday he had no plans to do so. He wanted Congress to go back and talk to their constituents during their recess to really see how the public feels about drilling.

Like that will matter to the dem elitists.

No, the dems are playing the we're all stupid card by saying something out of one side of their mouths while winking at each other knowing they have no intention of following through.

The republicans, including Bush, need to force them to either put up or shut up.

markk
08-05-2008, 10:16 AM
As of yesterday he had no plans to do so. He wanted Congress to go back and talk to their constituents during their recess to really see how the public feels about drilling.

Like that will matter to the dem elitists.

No, the dems are playing the we're all stupid card by saying something out of one side of their mouths while winking at each other knowing they have no intention of following through.

The republicans, including Bush, need to force them to either put up or shut up.

I think this transparent use of the public's misery to further their own political agenda rather than addressing the problem will hurt them in the election.

If the whole electorate read this article, that alone would damage them quite a bit, I think. It shows what they are really about, trying to hoodwink people into voting for them when in reality they like gas prices right where they are.

BigChiefFan
08-05-2008, 10:36 AM
I would think the leader of our country, BUSH, would be the one calling for congress to get back in session. Oh that's right, he's an incompetent boob.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 10:37 AM
Cali should give her the boot.

Yeah right. She's a San Fran lib.... they're an especially virulent strain of moonbat crazy.

BigChiefFan
08-05-2008, 10:47 AM
I love how people just chalk it up to craziness without any real substantial evidence to back their position. Pretty little boxes for the Republicans. And where is your fearless LEADER, you know the guy IN office? No, it's too easy to pass the buck off on others, instead of realizing you supported a cluster**** for Prez and we'll get more of the same from McCain.

**** common sense, I'm sticking to the political party, right, republicant's?

markk
08-05-2008, 11:29 AM
I love how people just chalk it up to craziness without any real substantial evidence to back their position. Pretty little boxes for the Republicans. And where is your fearless LEADER, you know the guy IN office? No, it's too easy to pass the buck off on others

What does that have to do with the blatant deception like Pelosi is perpetrating here?

chiefforlife
08-05-2008, 11:36 AM
What does that have to do with the blatant deception like Pelosi is perpetrating here?

While there is no defending Ms. Pelosi, I am sure "blatant deception" is not a partisan issue.

markk
08-05-2008, 11:39 AM
While there is no defending Ms. Pelosi, I am sure "blatant deception" is not a partisan issue.

Is this not an attempt to hoodwink voters into believing the Dem candidates in close elections are for drilling when they are not, and both they and the Democrat leadership know full well they are selling voters on "increased possibility of drilling if I elect this guy" when the reality is "zero possibility of drilling if I elect this guy" and moreover, it's a tacit admission of adapting party positions to what's popular in advance of the election regardless of what they actually believe and intend to do?

bsp4444
08-05-2008, 11:39 AM
Term Limits. When they use the entire country as a pawn in a game they play, we lose. Shameful behavior on all sides at all levels.

This I will agree with.

Discuss Thrower
08-05-2008, 11:40 AM
Term Limits. When they use the entire country as a pawn in a game they play, we lose. Shameful behavior on all sides at all levels.

We already have them - they're called elections.

Chief Henry
08-05-2008, 11:42 AM
This is a PSA for you people...

GO CHECK YOUR ****ING TIRE PRESSURE.

HC_Chief
08-05-2008, 11:43 AM
This is a PSA for you people...

GO CHECK YOUR ****ING TIRE PRESSURE.

...before the brownshirts do it for you.

bsp4444
08-05-2008, 11:43 AM
We already have them - they're called elections.

Elections can easily be bought, through advertising. Term limits might even the playing field a little bit.

Carlota69
08-05-2008, 12:27 PM
I'm a democrat, but I can't stand Pelosi or this weak-ass, pussified Congress. She needs to get some tension relief, if you know what I mean, and well, this congress needs to get ****ed as well.

HonestChieffan
08-05-2008, 12:28 PM
yea, but who would?

Sully
08-05-2008, 12:29 PM
If Bush doesn't call Congress back into special session for an energy showdown so the democrats are forced to face the public he should be impeached. :eek:

I'd like to see him do that, honestly.
I'd like for them to come up with some sort of plan so we can move forward, rather than obfuscate what each candidate is saying for the next few months.

Carlota69
08-05-2008, 12:34 PM
yea, but who would?

At this rate? The voters will soon enough.:doh!:

HonestChieffan
08-05-2008, 12:35 PM
we can hope

markk
08-05-2008, 01:07 PM
we can hope

Why would a state full of liberals punish a liberal for being a liberal?

HonestChieffan
08-05-2008, 01:34 PM
silly me, I lost my head with all this hope and change talk. You are correct.

bigfoot
08-05-2008, 03:29 PM
Guess Obama's race must be pretty tight , he's taking the house squeaker's advice.

"I do not believe that we should use the strategic oil reserves at this point. I have said and, in fact, supported a congressional resolution that said that we should suspend putting more oil into the strategic oil reserve, but the strategic oil reserve, I think, has to be reserved for a genuine emergency. You have a situation, let's say, where there was a major oil facility in Saudi Arabia that was destroyed as a consequence of terrorist acts, and you suddenly had huge amounts of oil taken out of the world market, we wouldn't just be seeing $4-a-gallon oil. We could see a situation where entire sectors of the country had no oil to function at all. And that's what the strategic oil reserve has to be for." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At Media Availability, St. Louis, MO, 7/7/08)

EXPIRATION DATE: Today (8/4/08): "Democrat Barack Obama called today for tapping the nation's strategic oil reserves to help drive down gasoline prices, a shift from his previous position on the issue."

Does a Poll Drop Count As an Emergency?
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2NlNDM5YmQ1YzM3NjA3MTBhMDU2MGM4NjQ0Y2RkMzg=

And off shore drilling:
"Obama implied that his willingness to allow the drilling in Florida "wasn't really a new position". But, of course, it is."
"As recently as late June, he said that, in order to protect the US coastline, he would enforce a drilling moratorium that has been in place since 1981. (Democratic leaders and environmentalists have supported that ban for years.)"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/05/oil.barackobama

8/1/08" U.S. Sen. Barack Obama said today he would be willing to open Florida's coast for more oil drilling if it meant winning approval for broad energy changes."
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/state/epaper/2008/08/01/0801obama1.html

ChiefaRoo
08-05-2008, 05:44 PM
I'm a democrat, but I can't stand Pelosi or this weak-ass, pussified Congress. She needs to get some tension relief, if you know what I mean, and well, this congress needs to get ****ed as well.


Yep. ;)

Guru
08-05-2008, 11:05 PM
I'm a democrat, but I can't stand Pelosi or this weak-ass, pussified Congress. She needs to get some tension relief, if you know what I mean, and well, this congress needs to get ****ed as well.

ROFL Great post!!!:clap:

jAZ
08-05-2008, 11:41 PM
This question goes to anyone.

Other than for reasons of election-year political expediance, why would it be necessary that Pelosi and Dems agree to move forward something that they regard as relatively bad public policy (a rushed bill crafted with many unwanted concessions) with long-term consequences... when they would wait 6 months and craft a bill with (if they are right about the election) FAR better terms?

It seems like people are trying to call this an approach that's politically expedient, but it seems to me that it's just the opposite. It's poltiically risky, but from a Dem point of view it makes for FAR better policy.

(note: I understand that not everyone here thinks that a bill that's more favorable to Dem policies positions is a better bill, but we are talking about Dem policy here not Con policy)

Mr. Kotter
08-05-2008, 11:54 PM
Anyone with a brain?

"Duh!?"

It's why even Obama has "clarified" his position....

I'm a democrat, but I can't stand Pelosi or this weak-ass, pussified Congress. She needs to get some tension relief, if you know what I mean, and well, this congress needs to get ****ed as well.

Yeppers. :thumb:

As for Justin's question: why move forward with "bad policy"....because given CURRENT circumstances and conditions (the price of gas, mostly; and the lack of ANY coherent and reasonable "Energy" policy---from EITHER side).....off-shore drilling is the most "reasonable" 'quick-fix'....and the American electorate, if nothing else, is ALL about "quick-fixes."

As for the "six month's" portion of your question, Justin; "they" must be reading the polls and conditions on the "ground" the same as I do...that we have, in essence, a statistical dead-heat, at a time when "they" should be enjoying a "landslide".....and are as nervous as they should be....

:shrug:

It's really that simple... :shrug:

jAZ
08-06-2008, 12:03 AM
As for Justin's question: why move forward with "bad policy"....because given CURRENT circumstances and conditions (the price of gas, mostly; and the lack of ANY coherent and reasonable "Energy" policy---from EITHER side).....off-shore drilling is the most "reasonable" 'quick-fix'....and the American electorate, if nothing else, is ALL about "quick-fixes."

It's really that simple... :shrug:
The only benefit to "quick fixes" is political benefit. And I was asking to set that aside.

Mr. Kotter
08-06-2008, 12:16 AM
The only benefit to "quick fixes" is political benefit. And I was asking to set that aside.

You can NOT set that aside; given this generation of Americans...and their insistence on immediate gratification. It is a huge part of the political calculus; which is something Reps understand, but Dems refuse to accept...IMHO.

:shrug:

SBK
08-06-2008, 01:08 AM
Pelosi is probably whipping someone good for letting this get out.

jAZ
08-06-2008, 01:12 AM
You can NOT set that aside; given this generation of Americans...and their insistence on immediate gratification. It is a huge part of the political calculus; which is something Reps understand, but Dems refuse to accept...IMHO.

:shrug:
Well, my question is other than the "political calculus". Which is to say, that there is a bunch of people outraged over this here... but when you look at it closely, the Dems here are doing what they think is truely the best thing, while putting themselves at political risk by avoiding the "quick fix" in favor of something closer to what they believe is the "best fix".

That "my friends", is an action to be credited not attacked. You might object to the ultimate preferences of the Dems, but even Cons should be able to admit that this is respectable behavior by the opposing party.

Guru
08-06-2008, 01:12 AM
Pelosi is probably whipping someone good for letting this get out.
hmmm, where is that SNL skit?

Mr. Kotter
08-06-2008, 01:20 AM
Well, my question is other than the "political calculus". Which is to say, that there is a bunch of people outraged over this here... but when you look at it closely, the Dems here are doing what they think is truely the best thing, while putting themselves at political risk by avoiding the "quick fix" in favor of something closer to what they believe is the "best fix".

That "my friends", is an action to be credited not attacked. You might object to the ultimate preferences of the Dems, but even Cons should be able to admit that this is respectable behavior by the opposing party.

Respectable behavior, perhaps, that is tantamount to setting oneself on your own sword. :shrug:

In politics, Machiavelli and most reasonable observers would NOT be impressed though.

JMHO

jAZ
08-06-2008, 01:35 AM
Respectable behavior, perhaps, that is tantamount to setting oneself on your own sword. :shrug:

In politics, Machiavelli and most reasonable observers would NOT be impressed though.

JMHO

It might be losing politics, but that's exactly my point.

That's the opposite position of almost everyone (on both sides) on this thread, and you and I seem to agree that most everyone on this thread is reading this situation incorrectly and attacking Pelosi for being politically expedient when she's really being true to her values and risking political power in the process.

Mr. Kotter
08-06-2008, 01:42 AM
It might be losing politics, but that's exactly my point.

That's the opposite position of almost everyone (on both sides) on this thread, and you and I seem to agree that most everyone on this thread is reading this situation incorrectly and attacking Pelosi for being politically expedient when she's really being true to her values and risking political power in the process.


She's being "true to her values" only in the sense....that she thought she could get away with it without too many folks taking notice (which talk radio has ensured won't happen,) and she's taking the risky road...ONLY (IMHO) because she thought no one would care.

That's not admirable, IMHO; it's more like expedient and calculated. :shrug:

mlyonsd
08-06-2008, 01:02 PM
She's being "true to her values" only in the sense....that she thought she could get away with it without too many folks taking notice (which talk radio has ensured won't happen,) and she's taking the risky road...ONLY (IMHO) because she thought no one would care.

That's not admirable, IMHO; it's more like expedient and calculated. :shrug:

If the republicans were doing it you can bet we'd have another Kaboom thread.

HonestChieffan
08-06-2008, 01:18 PM
Have you ever read the label on Kaboom? Man that has to be some nasty stuff with all the warnigs. Billy Mayes sold a ton of it though.

BCD
08-06-2008, 06:19 PM
Term Limits. When they use the entire country as a pawn in a game they play, we lose. Shameful behavior on all sides at all levels.
:clap: