"Shame, Shame, Shame"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lo-Volt

Member
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a cliffhanger vote held open by Republican leaders until they won, the U.S. House of Representatives passed by two votes on Friday a bill clearing the way for U.S. oil refineries to expand.

The legislation, written by Republican Joe Barton of Texas, barely won approval despite dropping a White House-backed provision that would have gutted clean air rules to help refineries and coal-powered utilities.

In the first major House vote since Texan Tom DeLay was forced to step down as majority leader, Republicans won, 212-210, in a roll call that ran more than 40 minutes, far beyond the allotted five minutes.

Democrats in the chamber chanted "shame, shame, shame" as the final tally was announced.

When over two dozen Republicans initially voted no, DeLay, Barton, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and new Majority Leader Roy Blunt circled the chamber and cajoled the holdouts.

The palm-sweating vote switched from "yes" to "no" several times, but Republican Rep. Mike Simpson, the speaker pro tempore, did not gavel the vote closed until it swung in the Republicans' favor.

Several Democrats protested that the vote was being held open. "I am informed that every member of Congress who is in town has voted," Democratic whip Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland said at one point, when the tally was 210 yes, 214 no.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi also complained, saying the proceedings were bringing "dishonor to the House."

The bill aims to add 2 million barrels per day of capacity by offering abandoned military bases for refinery construction sites.

It also speeds up permits by giving the Energy Department more authority over the process, and offer federal insurance to refiners in case new projects are delayed.

The bill was prompted by hurricanes Rita and Katrina, which plowed through the heart of the U.S. energy producing region and shut offshore drilling rigs and refineries.

Reuters.
 
hinch_wideweb__430x378.jpg
 
wtf why were democrats voting against this? we need more refineries in order to lower the cost of gas. fuck the environment!
 
Consumers: WE WANT CHEAP GAS
Govt: We need more refineries in the US
Consumers: BOOOOO!!

So you want to have your cake and eat it too? There hasn't been a refinery built in the US since 1976. High time a few were built. Who knows, it might prolong Mr. Chavez's time in office. :lol

max_cool said:
and what are we going to do with these refineries when the oil runs out?
don't worry. you'll be long dead before that happens. :)
 
max_cool said:
and what are we going to do with these refineries when the oil runs out?
Sell them, repurpose them, dismantle them, reuse the land for something else. Industry typically finds ways to be efficient - at least moreso than our government.

I don't see what the big deal is about this bill, unless it's got some sort of baby-raping amendment tacked on. We kind of need extra refining capacity to keep prices down and so forth.
 
Lhadatt said:
Sell them, repurpose them, dismantle them, reuse the land for something else. Industry typically finds ways to be efficient - at least moreso than our government.

I don't see what the big deal is about this bill, unless it's got some sort of baby-raping amendment tacked on. We kind of need extra refining capacity to keep prices down and so forth.

No it doesnt! There are tons of old Industrial plants around DFW. No one wants the land and they are too expensive to demolish.
 
King Jippo said:
don't worry. you'll be long dead before that happens. :)

not if we build more refineries so that we can consume oil at a faster rate. Remeber, all that needs to happen is the end of easy access to oil, that means 1/2 of the oil well, once we've drained the oil wells to half then you can say goodbye to the oil economy. Plus, why would anyone want to make the conscious decision to pollute more rather than keep it the same or better yet reduce pollution.
 
max_cool said:
not if we build more refineries so that we can consume oil at a faster rate. Remeber, all that needs to happen is the end of easy access to oil, that means 1/2 of the oil well, once we've drained the oil wells to half then you can say goodbye to the oil economy. Plus, why would anyone want to make the conscious decision to pollute more rather than keep it the same or better yet reduce pollution.

You honestly have no idea what you're talking about, and its really showing. Stop embarassing yourself. Even though its online, people can still tell when someone is flailing around in the dark and trying to discuss a topic they don't know anything about.
 
Incognito said:
this is the second time they've pulled this shit. first cafta, now this. nice fucking democracy in action.

Nice that someone noticed the biggest part of the story: the future of a rules-led institution and the state of minority rights in it. Frankly, I'm pissed at some of the people in this thread for accepting a legal, but anti-democratic effort to force representatives to change their votes by using the top man in the body, not only their party whips. That violated the spirit of the body, make no mistake, and the Senate damn well should remember that when it considers the bill, or any bill arrived to this way.
 
GDJustin said:
You honestly have no idea what you're talking about, and its really showing. Stop embarassing yourself. Even though its online, people can still tell when someone is flailing around in the dark and trying to discuss a topic they don't know anything about.

so then tell me, what constitues easily accessable oil? 'Cause once oil isn't as cheap to get out of the well as it is now, the cost of oil and gas will skyrocket and I say again, you can kiss the oil economy goodbye. You do know that not all of the oil in a well is extraced before the oil companies shutdown production on that well... right?

And I really don't think it's your place to lecture me on what I do and do not know without backing up your statements. How can anyone take you seriously when all you do is attack me personally, you didn't even point out what you thought was wrong in my post. Come back when you learn how to participate in a discussion.
 
King Jippo said:
don't worry. you'll be long dead before that happens. :)
Actually, experts have been predicting since the seventies that cheap oil will run out within the next twenty years. These are the same experts, by the way, who predicted we would hit US peak oil production in the early seventies (which we did).
 
I heard a clip on NPR it sounded like british fucking parliment. it was sort of cool actually :lol

"Does the Gentle Lady have a parlimentary inquiry?" :lol

edit:inquiry
 
scola said:
I heard a clip on NPR it sounded like british fucking parliment. it was sort of cool actually :lol

"Does the Gentle Lady have a parlimentary action?" :lol

The video is amazing, too.
 
Incognito and Lo-Volt are on point. This is at least the third time they've done this, after the Medicare drug benefit and CAFTA.
Several Democrats protested that the vote was being held open. "I am informed that every member of Congress who is in town has voted," Democratic whip Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland said at one point, when the tally was 210 yes, 214 no.
That's the issue right there. The ruling party holds open the vote, even when everyone has said yay or nay, and waits until the totals change to favor them, THEN close the vote and tally it up.

There's no way to get around how undemocratic that is.
 
There is a suggestion in left-wing enclaves on the 'net that Representative Tom DeLay was on the floor twisting the necessary votes for his party as the minutes ticked on, but I didn't see a news agency report that. Any of that true?
 
Confirmed.

The New York Times said:
Mr. Hastert repeatedly cornered Representative C. W. Bill Young, Republican of Florida, a longtime lawmaker who opposed the measure, and pressed him to change his vote.

Mr. DeLay, who may be officially out of power but not out of practice as a persuader, concentrated on Representative Roscoe G. Bartlett of Maryland.

The majority whip, Roy Blunt of Missouri, helped work on Representative Jim Gerlach of Pennsylvania, who was unhappy with a liability provision in the bill.

New York Times, reg. required.
 
Just saw the video... We'll keep the voting going until we're sure everyone has voted. Oh, we're winning now! Voting closed!

Fucking disgusting.
 
Incognito said:
just watched the video. pretty dispicable stuff. it's a shame the retention rate in congress is 90%.

I wonder what would happen if House Democrats kept the same attitude they showed by the end of the video. If this is a one-time thing, well, that's why I'm not a party member.
 
I can easily envision the CEOs of BP, ChevronTexaco & Exxon using controllers, moving their Republicans around the chamber. Pumping extra quarters in so they can get just one more continue.

On the flip side.. Environmentalists are controling their Democrats, only to face one of those rpg bosses that regenerates life and has 20 forms..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom