How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 How to Pass Cap and Trade..
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

How to Pass Cap and Trade..

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 07-09-2009 09:32 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Chaos, arm-twisting gave Pelosi win


After lawmakers had devoured the last of the Kalua Pig at last Thursday night’s White House Luau, Nancy Pelosi summoned her team back to the Capitol — to ensure the climate change bill wasn’t the next thing roasted on the spit.

Pelosi and her top lieutenants would spend the next four hours whipping, cajoling, begging and browbeating undecided Democrats — and triple-checking their whip lists to decide who was a solid “yes” and who was prevaricating on the cap-and-trade legislation.


On the day of the vote, the bleary-eyed tag team of Pelosi and Clyburn camped out in the cloakroom, just off the House floor, for nearly three hours.

One of Pelosi’s first targets was Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.), a key fence-sitter who wanted more money generated from the carbon trading to be directed to the research and development of green technology. Pelosi talked to him again and again, but he wouldn’t budge. Her message to him was the same as it was to others: It wasn’t worth voting against the bill because of what wasn’t in it. According to witnesses, Pelosi perched herself on the arm of Holt’s chair and went nose to nose with him for a half-hour warning him that his no vote could scuttle the entire climate change effort — and that liberals would have another chance to make their case once the bill came back from the Senate. Around 2 o’clock, he became a “yes.”

Then Pelosi began working Doggett as the two stood in the back of the chamber near the railing, making the same perfect-is-enemy-of-the-good argument she had used against Holt. Doggett ended up voting “yes.”During the vote, Washington Rep. Jay Inslee, one of the taller members of the House, guarded the doors on the floor leading out to the Speaker’s Lobby, warning members not to leave the floor in case anyone needed to switch his or her vote. But that didn’t stop some Democrats, like Colorado Rep. John Salazar, from voting no early and sneaking out to avoid getting pressured by party leaders.

When another Californian, Rep. Joe Baca, declared himself undeclared, Pelosi and her whip team surrounded him — and burst out into applause when he cast one of the decisive “yes” votes, according to an eyewitness.

Members who wanted to be spared of the Pelosi treatment — slinked in and out of the chamber hoping the speaker wouldn’t notice them.

Leadership aides say Texas Rep. Ciro Rodriguez promised Pelosi he’d vote yes, but voted no and sprinted from the chamber. California Rep. Xavier Becerra tried unsuccessfully to flag him on his cell phone — and Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) bounded into the ornate Speaker’s Lobby off the floor shouting, “Rodriguez! Rodriguez!” as puzzled reporters looked on.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/24364


Who would guess that this could be one of the most important bills to ever be voted on? Welcome to the Democratic circus. Send in the clowns....don't bother. They're here.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


1 posted 07-09-2009 09:53 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Southern and Midwestern Democrats have a long list of concerns about the bill's electricity, agriculture, and cap and trade provisions. A version of the climate bill narrowly passed the House last month, after administration officials and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pressured a group of skeptical Democrats to vote for the legislation.

In the Senate, it won't be nearly as easy to twist arms, and floor time will remain a major problem.

   http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24751.html


Thank the Lord...
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


2 posted 07-09-2009 10:18 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

          I read your account of the passage of the Cap and Trade legislation, above.  I was surprised that Yahoo would present such a jaundiced and frankly biased account of anything.  I felt that surely it must have had something decent or at least potentially objective to say about the process.  I believe that Yahoo generally makes at least something of an effort in that direction most of the time.

     Since you were thoughtful enough to provide the source for you comments, the article itself from Yahoo, I decided to follow up and read it.

     I found myself quite surprised.

     The article that in your account was something that sounded like a bitter attack on the Democrats and on Ms. Pelossi's House leadership was actually quite admiring of her skill and professionalism.  I suggest that others have a look at the original, of course, and make their own determination.  Nobody should take my word for it.

     Whether the Cap and Trade Bill is a good bill or not, I don't know.  I tend to be in favor of legislation that reduces production of greenhouse gasses, especially methane and the more toxic stuff, including carbon monoxide.  If cap and trade helps reduce that, it may be a good idea.  That's certainly not an expert opinion, that's an asthmatic's opinion.  Call me a special interest group representative of those folks with touchy lungs.  A fanatic from the pro oxygen lobby who has experience in knowing how unpleasant it is not to breathe for long periods of time.  

     I regard air as more important than conversation.  Air first, then talk is what I say.  I'm very selfish that way.  If you wish to do it the other way around, please feel free to begin not breathing now to show your comittment to the cause; I'll get back to you later, at our mutual convenience.  My people will get in touch with your heirs for a lunch date, unless they happen to agree with you, in which case have the descendants of yours who want to put breathing higher on the agenda get in touch with me so we can discuss reality.

     Yadda, Yadda, Yadda.

     If you think I'm a bit brisk about my opinion here, consider that the basic Republican point of view is that they aren't ready to talk yet to people who feel that they're strangling now.  Having grown up till I was 14 in a place where simply living there was the equivalent of smoking three packs of cigarettes a day, and nobody was willing to put any controls of the sulfur emissions because it was unamerican and cost too much, I reserve the right to say that strangling does give me a right to speak right up, and even to sound a bit peppery about it, by golly.

     Yadda, yadda indeed.

     I think the Democrats did quite well.


Sincerely, Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


3 posted 07-09-2009 10:54 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Of course it was admiring of her skill, Bob, in the same way one could admire Hitler for his efficiency in exterminating Jews, in the same way one admires the rapport of a con man or the smooth movements of a card mechanic.

She's good at what she does...as long as you admire what she does.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


4 posted 07-10-2009 02:09 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

Dear Mike,

     Your comments about the Speaker of The House and Adolph Hitler are quite provocative.

     If, in fact, you believed them, your actual moral responsibilities would quite possibly make you liable to arrest.  I take it you are not making the sort of threat that would follow if you did in fact mean them, given that there appear to be no actual points of correspondence between Ms. Pellosi and the late unlamented Reichs- chancellor.  She being a she, for example; and he being a he.  She being Leftwing, he being rightwing.  He actively campaigning for the extermination of whole groups of people from the beginning of his career, she campaigning for increased civil liberties.  He being active in attempting to get the business community behind the right wing program, and attempting to put limits on labor and the rights of labor.  She being somewhat more pro-labor and less pro capital and monopoly interests.

    I could go on, but I'm basically beating a dead horse.  Hitler, for example, trying to limit the roles of women to child-rearing, cooking, and church-going; Ms. Pelossi being in favor of women being able to chose a wider range of life styles.


[This message has been edited by Ron (07-10-2009 08:19 AM).]

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 07-10-2009 07:39 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

If, in fact, you believed them, your actual moral responsibilities would quite possibly make you liable to arrest.  I take it you are not making the sort of threat that would follow if you did in fact mean them

huh? Wait, let me capitalize that....HUH? Your planet might be a nice place to visit, Bob, but I wouldn't want to live there!


hmmmm, after thinking about it, you could be ahead of your time, Bob. It would not be surprising that, in the near future, any negativity toward a Democratic leader could be  viewed as a threat, punishable by arrest. Thank you for showing how real that possibility is.....

[This message has been edited by Balladeer (07-10-2009 08:14 AM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


6 posted 07-10-2009 05:03 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Democratic has nothing to do with it, Mike.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


7 posted 07-10-2009 06:03 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Im not sure what your point is Mike, isnt this how senior members of political parties normally work? Over here they call them whips, I believe you call them the same. There are official whips and members who take up the whip to rally other members before an important vote. Its normal practice in both parties as far as I understand it or is there something special that Im missing about Pelosi taking up the whip?

Perhaps it's that youre against the whole idea of whipping up support for legislation and keeping members focused on the party mission - regardless of which party employs the tactic.

If thats the case I agree 100% -  In my view a representative of the people should only be influenced by the people he represents.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


8 posted 07-10-2009 07:46 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I suppose that is my point, grinch....with qualifications.  There's no doubt I consider Pelosi a sleazebucket and have even before she ascended to her new throne. She, along with Gore and select others, are using the global warming issue to get rich. Something more sticks in my craw, though.

This is actually a very important bill, actually one of the most important bills to be voted on. Anyone who studies it will have to realize that the bill MUST result in more unemployment, higher prices and more taxes for everyone, even acknowledged by Obama himself. The bill is the elephant in the room. No one wants to talk about it. As I said earlier, the newspapers didn't even cover it on it's election day, nor have any of the major news networks discussed it in detail. It is a bill that Obama wants passed with as little fanfare and publicity as possible, an uninvited guest slipping through the back door. Many of the public who did know something about it, inundated their congressmen with calls, demanding that they vote no.

This was not a simple thing like "rallying members before an important vote" or "keeping members focused on the party mission". The Democrats could have passed it easily with ther majority, had they believed it to be a good thing. The problem was that many didn't and one gets the scenario painted - by the article I supplied and others - of congressmen hiding in rooms, sneaking down hallways to avoid detection, not answering their cellphones, trying to get out of the building without getting caught and  having to go through the mental browbeating by Pelosi that would go on for hours until they submitted to her demands. With any bill, this would be disgraceful. With THIS bill, and the effect it would have on the American people, it's criminal.

I guess that's my point, although I don't really need one. The description of the Alley is a place for "flaming, complainin', and screaming your head off." That's what I'm doing. I'm in agreement with you that the representatives should be responsible to the people they represent and do what they feel is best for those people. This type of circus scenario taking place indicates that the reverse is true.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


9 posted 07-10-2009 11:02 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

    NOT to me from the article you mention, Mike, only from the version that you report and palm off as an accurate representation of the original.  The original, for example, tends to use as examples those folks who want to duck out on a "yes" vote those who don't believe the legislation is tough enough on those who don't clear up their acts; those, in fact, who want the bill to be tougher.

     Your account originally, and just now suggests that the disagreement is because these folks agree with you.  If this is true, I see little if any evidence of such a conclusion in the article that you quote.

     The slant of the article is one of praise directed at the competence of the Democratic leadership, and how well it worked with the administration to make sure the bill passed.  There is absolutely no mention of this in your comments.  

     I simply suggest that other people read the article that you cite in support of your account and draw their own conclusions.

     There must be fifty accounts or reports of these events that would agree with your feelings about Democrats in general and the Speaker of the House in particular.  There are all sorts of accurate and unpleasant things you could say about the woman which would get a growl from me but nothing more.  If I think it's got truth to it, what am I going to say, Mike?

     If you want to talk with me about cap and trade itself, I confess I don't know all that much, though I'm trying to get up to speed.  I can't quarrel with you about that very much, I'm still learning.

     Misreporting the content of an article that you have a fairly good Idea that I'm going to follow up your citation on, and comparing somebody who hasn't sent anybody to the gas chambers or even tried to, to Hitler are fairly predictable red flags.  I don't feel particularly useful carrying this area of discussion further, since there are lots of things I do agree with you about and I like you enormously.  If we could shift this to somewhat more factual grounds, I'd really appreciate it. It'd give me a chance to show my respect more directly and to build consensus in those places we can more solidly.  I'd like that better.

     All my best, Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


10 posted 07-10-2009 11:22 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, I misreported nothing. Everything in my original post was cut and pasted from the article. I included the link so the entire article could be read.

Of course it was an appreciation of her tactics but you can judge what kind of appreciation by the title of the article Chaos, arm-twisting gave Pelosi win

Does that sound like the writer of the article is lavishing her with praise, calling her tactics arm-twisting and creating chaos?

Calling my comments threats or something that would cause me to be arrested is so far removed from reality that it left me cyberspacically speechless.

BTW, I didn't campare Pelosi to Hitler. I compared her tactics and efficiency for reaching desired goals to the efficiency of tactics Hitler used to reach his, or card sharks, or flim-flam men. There's a difference.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


11 posted 07-11-2009 12:36 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I won't dispute with you on this, Mike.  If others are curious, I ask them to read the article in question.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


12 posted 07-11-2009 05:42 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
This is actually a very important bill


I agree, and presumably so do both parties, one believing that it shouldnt be passed and one believing it should and both putting pressure on their respective members to vote accordingly.

Thats the bit thats missing from your original post, the fact that both parties use whips and both will have been twisting arms and bullying representatives into towing the party line. It happens all the time as I said earlier, especially when important bills are concerned, thats why most votes mirror the political affiliation of those voting.

I dont like the idea of whips much, from either side of the political divide. It disconnects the people from the process of government, which is the exact opposite of what the framers of your political system originally intended. Inserting the will of a third entity the party between the will of the people and their representative vote can never be a good thing.

Oddly the answer may be to move away from the current two party system that seems to embody the image of democracy, not to a one party system but to a zero party system where the only affiliation and allegiance a representative of the people has is to the people he represents.

Itll never happen though.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 07-11-2009 07:05 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

the fact that both parties use whips and both will have been twisting arms and bullying representatives into towing the party line.

I won't disagree with that, Grinch. That is the way of our system and probably democratic systems all over the world. I've never seen, however, it taken to the level Pelosi has raised it to and, believe me, if the Republicans had employed tactics even similar to this, I, you, and the rest of the world would have heard of it loud and clear.

No, we will never see what you suggest. It would be nice to see a few tweaks in the system, though, like congressmen being voted for, and having funds raised, by  the people in their own state. In the case of Chris Dodd and others, he raised something like a few hundred thousand from his home state for re-election and millions from out-of-staters. How does one imagine, then, that his allegiance is to the people he represents?...but that's a whole other thread. Thanks for your input
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


14 posted 07-11-2009 08:48 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Looking at how the sausage is made is never very appetizing is it?

quote:

Published on Saturday, October 2, 2004 by the Associated Press

House Report Shows Arm-Twisting for Vote
By Larry Margasak


WASHINGTON - Arms have always been twisted during close congressional votes on major legislation, but an ethics report rebuking House Majority Leader Tom DeLay added something the public rarely learns: what lawmakers really say to each other.

The House ethics committee report even reveals what Republican members didn't say but were thinking as they unsuccessfully pleaded with Rep. Nick Smith R-Mich., to support a prescription drug benefit in Medicare.

The following are thoughts, comments and remembrances of the November 2003 events, as told to ethics committee investigators for their report on attempts to pressure Smith.

As DeLay, R-Texas, approached Smith in late November 2003, he was thinking based on prior conversations that he would be "stuck" talking with the Michigan lawmaker for a long time.

That might explain why the following conversation lasted only eight seconds.

DeLay: "I will personally endorse your son (a candidate for Congress). That's my last offer."

There was, in fact, no first offer. DeLay said it was his exit strategy to end the conversation quickly.

It was long enough, though, for the House ethics committee on Thursday to criticize DeLay for trying to trade a political endorsement for a vote. The committee also rebuked Rep. Candice Miller , R-Mich., for a heavy-handed attempt at persuasion, and Smith himself, for making exaggerated statements about the pressure he received.

On Friday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said, "This offer of a quid pro quo further taints the Republicans' Medicare prescription drug bill."

The attempts to link Smith's vote to his son's candidacy was pervasive throughout the ethics report. Brad Smith eventually lost in the primary as he tried to succeed his retiring father.

Most of the approaches occurred during the pre-dawn hours of Nov. 22, 2003, when the Medicare vote was held open by GOP leaders from 3 a.m. to 5:51 a.m. Normally, a typical 15-minute vote may be held open about five minutes for late-arriving members.

The Medicare legislation passed 220-215 without Smith's support.

"Well, I hope your son doesn't come to Congress," Miller recalled saying as Smith stayed on the House floor after voting.

Smith, rising out of his seat, said he responded: "You get out of here."

Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., was sitting nearby. He was thinking: "It was not pleasant."

After the marathon vote finally ended and members were leaving, Smith encountered Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif. Smith said Cunningham began waving what appeared to be a billfold.

"We've got $10,000 already ... to make sure your son doesn't get elected," Smith recalled Cunningham saying.

Cunningham said he didn't recall waving the billfold and denied mentioning any specific amount.

Besides DeLay, two of the most important Republicans to approach Smith were Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson. Members of the presidential Cabinet are allowed in the House chamber.

Thompson said he asked Smith if he "had any questions on the bill that I could answer, or if there was any information that I could provide."

Smith said no.

Was there "any chance" of a yes vote, Thompson asked.

Smith said no.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1002-23.htm



quote:

DeLay's arm-twisting won airport security fight for GOP

By Jill Zuckman | Washington Bureau
    November 3, 2001

WASHINGTON - In the days before the House of Representatives rejected turning over airport security to federal employees, House Democrats watched in dismay as Majority Whip Tom DeLay rounded up the precise number of votes needed to continue private security screening at the nation's airports.

"Arms have been twisted out of their sockets," said Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.) with a mixture of glumness and awe.

Nicknamed "The Hammer," DeLay (R-Texas) is charged with counting votes and persuading lawmakers to side with the Republican leadership on important matters. His maneuvering, along with the help of others, on the airport bill helped turn what many thought would be easy passage of legislation federalizing airport security into a painful defeat for Democrats.

................

On Friday, President Bush urged Congress to meet quickly to send him a final bill.

"I believe the differences are small, and I believe they can be reconciled quickly," Bush said.

Securing the nation's airports became a priority after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

But while the Senate unanimously endorsed a plan to make airport security workers federal employees, House conservatives objected on long-standing ideological grounds to swelling the government's workforce and increasing the number of likely Democratic union employees. Instead, they preferred to allow private contractors to continue handling airport security under federal supervision.

In the House, DeLay rounded up lobbyists for the airlines, which originally supported the Senate plan to make security workers federal employees.

In a basement room of the Capitol, DeLay told about 20 of the airline executives, according to one lobbyist: "You've got to get on board, we just bailed you out," a reference to the legislation that gave financial aid to ailing airlines. "You've got to back us on this, it's ideological."

Although most of the airlines sat out the security fight, DeLay's intervention kept them from lobbying for the Democratic bill.

....

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta met on Capitol Hill with lawmakers. In one case he spent more than an hour with Rep. Jack Quinn (R-N.Y.), scrawling four pages of notes about Quinn's concerns.
.......

At the last minute, the GOP bill was altered to provide an exemption for liability from the events of Sept. 11 to the New York Port Authority. That brought many members of the New York delegation on board.

Liability exemption also was included for Boeing in exchange for the corporation's help in lobbying lawmakers who still were undecided, House and Senate sources said.

On the evening of the vote, DeLay was serving a Mexican dinner to colleagues in his first-floor Capitol suite. Outside the House chamber, lobbyists from the Department of Transportation, the White House and the Aviation Security Association loitered, waiting for lawmakers to arrive, ready to explain and cajole at DeLay's behest.

With no votes to spare, the Democratic bill to federalize airport security workers failed 218-214. With that, the Republican bill to continue using private contractors for security passed 286-139.
   http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/movies/chi-0111030124nov03,0,1818936.story





Politico is an excellent source though.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> How to Pass Cap and Trade.. Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors