Did House Democrats Buy Moderate Votes on Global Warming Bill?

July 17, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (10)

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

Back in the days when the Republicans controlled the U.S. House of Representatives, the Democrats repeatedly accused them of abusing the power of the majority to further their agenda. In one particularly onerous charge, repeated for days in the media, they accused the GOP of trying to "buy" the support of then-Rep. Nick Smith, R-Mich., for President Bush's signature Prescription Drug Reform package with the promise of campaign contributions for his son, who Smith hoped would succeed him in Congress.

To show how seriously the Democrats took the issue, then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stood in the well of the House in December of 2005 to offer a privileged resolution which, in part, accused the Republicans of "bullying and threatening Members to vote against their conscience."

Pelosi's resolution, which also accused the Republicans of "violat(ing) their own rules and the customs and decorum of the House to win votes," called on then-Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to take whatever actions might be necessary to prevent further abuse of the House rules.

But that was a long time ago. Things are different now that Pelosi is Speaker and the Democrats have a comfortable majority—or are they?

On Friday Politico's Mike Thrush reported on what the publication called a "Big Dem cash dump on eve of climate vote." In his piece, Thrush wrote that, "Three House Democratic leaders who were whipping members on the climate change bill gave tens of thousands in campaign cash to party moderates around the time of the 219-212 vote on June 26, according to Federal Election Commission records."

And one of those leaders doling out money was, don't get ahead of me, Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Thrush does allow that not all those Democrats who got money voted to pass the Waxman-Markey legislation but the timing of the contributions is suspicious.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who co-authored the bill, and who gave at least $16,000 in contributions to members who voted "Yes" on his bill, said through a spokesman that the contributions were nothing more than the usual "end-of-quarter activity." Which sounds a lot like the kind of thing the Republicans might have said when they were in the majority.

Tags:
energy policy and climate change,
global warming

Reader Comments Read all comments (10)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

panchmahals scass tkuk right ellisbridge dead crux matching ascusc submitters ivax

Buy Ambien of AL 9:38AM April 05, 2010

Your politicians are taking this off topic.

Q: Why not focus on real environmental problems instead of a fake problems?

A: Because they care about money and the power, not the environment.

The AGW lie is getting really old, and you’re letting your politicians use is to destroy the credibility of your movement. In 1988 James Hansen testified before congress to scare us about global warming. See his failed predictions on page 7 of this PDF:

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1988/1988_Hansen_etal.pdf

All satellite data, including this from the University of Alabama at Huntsville proves that he was wrong. The predicted warming never occurred:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/HANSEN_AND_CONGRESS.jpg

2008 was 0.3 degrees colder than 1988, not 0.7 degrees warmer, as he predicted. Now politicians are threatening to burden the economy with ‘Cap-and-Trade’, a massive tax increase on all conventional energy usage, to be paid for by you every time you buy anything manufactured or transported using energy, which includes nearly everything buy, and your utility bill. They claim to be protecting your children’s future, but they are really impoverishing your children’s future with this additional burden. Read about this deliberate hoax from 1988:

http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/hansens_anniversary_testimony/

We are being forced to pay for less reliable, uneconomical sources of energy while being told they are viable alternatives, which is not true. All of the so-called ‘alternative’ sources of energy, including wind and solar, equal less than one percent of mankind’s needs, and don’t ever produce enough electricity to pay for themselves, without subsidies. Meanwhile, hydrocarbon energy and nuclear energy are throttled for no good reason.

Real scientists (not patronage-money grant seekers) never accepted this theory:

31,478 scientists signed a petition opposing the man-made global warming theory. Their reasoning is outlined in a peer reviewed journal article detailing the evidence that disproved the theory:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

"The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on "going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world".

When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown."

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=3116

Barry of CA 3:09AM July 30, 2009

The opitomy of inaccuracy, arrogance and demagogery is auradawnveirs of ca .You have something negative about everybody. Your Global Warming sermon is ridiculous to say the least.

Stanley Stuart feingold of NY 7:35PM July 21, 2009

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

Latest Videos

advertisement