White House renews energy bill veto threat 3

Comments View as Threaded

1. 

   Pangolin Posted 9:37 am
   03 Dec 2007

   Screw the White HousePelosi needs to get an aid to come up with a list of the GOP's favorite pet projects and attatch funding of every single one of them to the energy bill. If they want to veto their own pork let them.
   The pResident only gets to sign or veto what the Congress sends him and he's about as popular as Hitler's jock-strap right now. The more he gets on TV and whines about Congress the more people are going to be reminded that this idiot and his Republican cabal handed us two losing wars and impending financial collapse.
   The only lump of coal the pResident deserves is in his stocking and no funding for the rest of it.
   
   Put the Carbon Back

   Permalink

2. 

   Tasermons Partner Posted 10:56 am
   03 Dec 2007

   Maybe...We have enough votes to prevent a filibuster, but I don't think we have enough (currently) to override a veto.
   It seems Bush's main stick points are the RES and the tax increases on oil.
   If they get rid of the tax increases, maybe it'll be enough to get it through, since the RES includes the biofuel standards he wants.
   Yes, I know, it'd mean more concessions, but in the long run, they may invoke windfall profit taxes on the oil companies anyway, so i say the bill would still be pretty strong without the tax increase.
   If, however, they did ecide to get rid of the RES (especially the 15% renewable utilities regulation), then the bill would essentially be worthless.
   In that case, it'd be best to not pass anythin' and wait until the next elections before tryin' to come up with another energy bill.
   Problem is, that'd be valuable time lost while the problems grow larger.

   Permalink

3. 

   GreenEngineer Posted 5:37 am
   04 Dec 2007

   Energy policy strategyAs time wears on, I'm getting less and less impressed with this energy bill.
   The good, potentially, includes an extension of the solar tax credit, higher CAFE standards, and an RPS.
   The bad includes continuing giveaways to big oil, and (worse, for the precedent it sets) the ethanol mandate.
   In my mind, the solar tax credit is the only immediately critical (i.e. high urgency) item here.  The solar industry is finally starting to roll, and a continuation of the existing credit would help sustain momentum at a critical time.
   Federal solar legislation seems to have an enormous level of public support, judging by the reaction that was generated when it was removed from a draft version of the bill.  We might be able to pass at least a short-term extension as a freestanding bill, given that level of support.
   An RPS is good, but will take time to have any impact.  CAFE standards are also a long-term item, and may not even be particularly beneficial depending on who you talk to.  So both of these measures could be put into a later bill.
   What I'm getting to is this: Although I'd probably be willing to swallow the ethanol mandate in order to get the solar tax credit and the RPS, I don't see that it's worth compromising just to get an energy bill passed.  If Pelosi etc stick to their guns, then either Bush has to veto the bill and start the process over, or he has to hold his nose and sign off on CAFE/solar TC/RPS.  If he does veto it, then we try again next administration, probably with much better chances of success.  In the meantime, try to pass a short-term extension to the solar tax credit.
   It seems to me that the conservatives have more to lose here than the progressives.  Why not call their bluff and force them to a tough decision?  Can anyone explain why this would be a BAD idea?

   Permalink