The Senate held a cloture vote this morning to overcome a threatened filibuster from Senate Republicans. It failed 59-40 -- one vote short of the 60 votes needed. Reid now says he'll introduce the bill again later today without the clean-energy tax provisions.
More later. Right now I'm so disgusted and pissed off I don't know what to say.
UPDATE: Well, here's one thing to say, to the Associated Press: the first line of your article says that Republicans blocked the bill because of "new taxes" on oil companies. That is straightforwardly false, and deserves a correction. Nobody proposed any new taxes. The proposal was to rescind the sweetheart tax breaks the oil and gas industry got in the 2005 Energy Act. Removing a tax break is not raising taxes, as you acknowledge later in the piece:
The oil companies had pressed lawmakers to oppose repeal of the $13.5 billion in tax breaks provided them by Congress in 2004 and 2005. They argued the tax relief was essential as an incentive for domestic oil and gas production and refinery expansion and that rolling back the tax breaks would lead to higher energy prices. [my emphasis]
Please do the world a favor and don't parrot Republican talking points in the first sentence of your $%#! piece.
Also, you note that a report from the Joint Economic Committee refutes the oil company contention that removing tax breaks will raise energy prices for consumers. You might have cited other studies. Or you might -- stop me if this sounds too crazy -- have said the following: "The contention by oil companies that repealing tax breaks will raise consumer energy prices is false." That's called giving readers the information they need to assess current events, as opposed to dutifully transcribing both sides' talking points.
John McCain’s troubles are the world’s troubles
George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]
Al Franken (D-Minn.)
Comments
View as Flat
josullivan58 Posted 2:20 am
13 Dec 2007
The republicans were never going to cooperate. The "if you compromise a little, we'll vote for the bill" was a ruse from the very start. Even if the oil companies stop getting tax breaks and the bill gets out congress Bush will sure as hell veto it.
If a man will reject something that has broad bipartisan support like health care for children, he'll never sign a bill that his allies in the auto and oil industries don't like.
The democrats should have forced a filibuster immediately. The net results would have been the same but without the public embarrassment.
Permalink
GreenEngineer Posted 3:32 am
13 Dec 2007
Permalink
Beth Wellington Posted 4:05 am
13 Dec 2007
Permalink
Erik Hoffner Posted 5:57 am
13 Dec 2007
The Orion Grassroots Network: 1,100+ grassroots groups working for conservation & more
Permalink
meander Posted 6:07 am
13 Dec 2007
Dan Froomkin's invaluable White House Watch in the Washington Post sums up the situation nicely:
Historians looking back on the Bush presidency may well wonder if Congress actually existed.
Time and time again, President Bush has run circles around what is, at least on paper, a co-equal branch of government. Sometimes he doesn't bother to ask Congress for its approval. Sometimes he demands it -- and gets it.
Amazingly enough, that didn't change when the Democrats won control of the House and Senate. They just make a bit more fuss before rolling over.
...
Salon blogger Glenn Greenwald surveys the morning's headlines and concludes that "all of this behavior by the Democrats is absolutely necessary. They have no choice. Otherwise, Rush Limbaugh and Fox News will attack them for being weak (as though there is some circumstance under which they wouldn't) and that would be terrible. Nothing exudes strength, courage, toughness and resolve like having your behavior continuously described -- accurately -- as 'bowing,' 'capitulating,' 'backing down,' 'caving' and 'surrendering.' Those are the verbs Americans love most when looking for the party to lead them."
Permalink