Tag Archives: boehner

Paul Ryan Votes Against the Debt Ceiling Increase

by KristinaRosenba Posted on February 11, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

With John Boehner finally crying uncle over the debt ceiling and dumping the whole thing on Democrats, the only suspense left was which members of the Republican leadership would suck it in and vote yes to get the bill over the finish line. Here’s the answer:

Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy voted for the increase. House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, on the other hand, voted against the bill.

There you go. Even Eric Cantor gritted his teeth and voted for the increase, but Paul Ryan didn’t. Kinda makes you think he might still be keeping a presidential run in the back of his mind, doesn’t it?

More: 

Paul Ryan Votes Against the Debt Ceiling Increase

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Paul Ryan Votes Against the Debt Ceiling Increase

Boehner Gives In, Introduces Clean Debt Ceiling Bill

by ErnestoCTL Posted on February 11, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

John Boehner has surrendered completely on the debt ceiling. None of his proposals managed to attract majority support among Republicans, so now he plans to introduce a clean bill and leave it up to Democrats to pass it:

“House Republican leaders told members this morning that it is clear the paid-for military COLA provision will not attract enough support, so we will be bringing up a ‘clean’ debt limit bill tomorrow,” a Republican official said, referring to a plan on veterans’ benefits. “Boehner made clear the G.O.P. would provide the requisite number of Republican votes for the measure but that Democrats will be expected to carry the vote.”

…Mr. Boehner explained the decision to go forward with a “clean” debt ceiling bill as a reflection of the political reality that he simply did not have enough Republican votes to pass anything more ambitious.

“It’s the fact that we don’t have 218 votes,” he said after meeting with House Republicans, “and when you don’t have 218 votes, you have nothing.” He added that he expected almost all of the House Democrats to vote to pass the bill, though he said he would still need to muster about 18 Republican votes to get the legislation over the finish line. “We’ll have to find them,” Mr. Boehner said. “I’ll be one.”

So whom did Boehner surrender to? That’s actually a little fuzzy. Democrats were willing to support his previous plan, which would have tied the debt limit increase to a restoration of full benefits for veterans, but it was the tea party that rebelled against that plan. So in a way, this was basically a surrender to the tea party.

In any case, that’s that. Boehner has decided (probably wisely) to take one for the team and get a bill passed so that Republicans can move on. In a way, this is the best choice he could have made. He gets the debt limit off the table, which is good for the party, since it means no more public debacles getting in the way of their election-year messages. At the same time, he’s allowing virtually the entire Republican caucus to vote against it, which is also good for the party, since it allows individual candidates to rail against it and attack big-spending Democrats. And who loses? No one, really. Boehner himself will take some flack as a sellout, but he’s been taking it anyway.

So will Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan vote for the debt ceiling increase? How about Kevin McCarthy, who will theoretically be the guy in charge of rounding up those 18 votes? Good question. Wait and see.

Link to original: 

Boehner Gives In, Introduces Clean Debt Ceiling Bill

Posted in ATTRA, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Boehner Gives In, Introduces Clean Debt Ceiling Bill

Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

by EstelaPalfreyma Posted on January 22, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last week’s budget bill was hurried through before anyone really had a chance to read the hundreds of riders and amendments that got tacked onto it. This was a very deliberate decision. John Boehner may have said that he wished Congress had more time to review the bill, but he knew perfectly well that the main reason for the rush was the fact that the House passed a 3-day continuing resolution after the final text was first posted. There were only three days to look at the bill because that’s what the Republican leadership wanted.

This means that we’ll be discovering cute little buried acorns in this bill for a while, and today Patrick Caldwell digs one up:

One small section could upend the Internal Revenue Service’s ability to regulate political organizations hoping to become nonprofits. Tacked on as a symbolic effort to mollify conservatives’ anti-IRS mania, the text is so overly vague that it could mean the dissolution of longstanding rules. Or nothing at all. No one’s really sure.

….The relevant section is buried on page 439 of the gigantic bill. Just nine lines long and 68 words, the two clauses say money designated for the IRS cannot be used to “target citizens of the United States for exercising any right guaranteed under the first Amendment” or to target “groups for regulatory scrutiny based on their ideological beliefs.”

….All of the tax experts reached by Mother Jones were mystified by the use of the word “target,” an unusual term to be applied to the IRS. “I’m not even sure what targeting means,” says Owens.

This is obviously a sop to tea partiers, who continue to be obsessed by the idea that the IRS “targeted” them unfairly in 2010. The real scandal, of course, wasn’t the fact that tea party groups got some scrutiny, but the fact that more groups don’t get scrutiny. The law pretty clearly limits the tax exemption of groups that are directly engaged in political activity, and it ought to be applied to far more groups than it is now. That includes tea party groups, virtually all of which were created specifically to engage in political activity.

But now that law is in conflict with a hastily written provision that forbids “targeting” any groups for engaging in free speech. If courts interpret that as forbidding the IRS from going after groups engaged in political advocacy, it could upend campaign finance law in the United States.

Or maybe not. But you can rest assured that this will be coming to a court near you sometime soon.

Read more:  

Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Did Congress Just Kill Regulation of Spending By Political Groups?

Chart of the Day: Republicans Rule Sunday Morning

by Charline46P Posted on December 31, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Steve Benen has once again tallied up all the guests on the five major Sunday morning chat shows, and as usual, Republicans rule the roost. The chart below shows everyone with 10 or more appearances, and 77 percent of them are Republicans:

This really is a bit of mystery. It’s easy to go on about how the beltway media is obsessed with Republicans no matter who’s in charge, yada yada yada, but that’s not really a satisfying explanation. Nor is it because one side happens to have more charismatic leaders than the other: it’s true that neither Harry Reid nor Nancy Pelosi are on this list, but neither are John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. So what explains it? Are Republicans more aggressive than Democrats about getting themselves booked? Are Democrats more boring than Republicans? Do Republicans get better ratings? Is theatrical intransigence just fundamentally better TV?

Seriously, what’s the deal? “Reporters love Republicans” just doesn’t cut it. So what’s up?

Originally posted here: 

Chart of the Day: Republicans Rule Sunday Morning

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Chart of the Day: Republicans Rule Sunday Morning

2014 Could Be a Good Year For President Obama

by adndseu13da Posted on December 18, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A couple of days ago I wrote that 2013 had been a rough year for President Obama:

It started with the fiscal cliff showdown and then barreled straight into Scandalmania (Benghazi+IRS+AP subpoenas); Edward Snowden and the NSA leaks; the Syria U-turn; the government shutdown; and finally the Obamacare website debacle.

Steve Benen takes a look at these same events and pushes back:

Twice congressional Republicans threatened debt-ceiling default; twice Obama stood his ground….Congressional Republicans shut down the government to extract White House concessions. Obama and congressional Democrats stood firm and the GOP backed down….forged an international agreement to rid Syria of chemical weapons….The “scandals” the media hyped relentlessly in the spring proved to be largely meaningless.

Nice try! And there’s something to this. Obama did manage to squeeze out “victories” in the fiscal cliff and government shutdown fights, Scandalmania mostly turned into a nothingburger, and Syria and Iran may yet turn out to be foreign policy wins.

But at best, that’s for the future. For now, 2013 just looks a year that Obama barely survived, bruised and bloody. It’s possible that the other guy looks even worse, of course, and after watching John Boehner’s press conference a couple of days ago, I’d say it’s fair to think so.

The good news, such as it is, is that all this stuff might set up Obama for a decent 2014. If Republicans realize it’s pointless to pick more debt ceiling fights; if Obamacare starts working smoothly; if we strike a decent deal with Iran; and if the economy picks up—if all those things happen, then 2014 will look pretty good. It probably can’t look much worse.

Credit: 

2014 Could Be a Good Year For President Obama

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 2014 Could Be a Good Year For President Obama

These Cities Are Trying to Bully Undocumented Immigrants Out of Town

by EvanGenders Posted on December 5, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

As House Speaker John Boehner continues to block immigration reform, a couple of US cities are pushing laws that would run immigrants out of town.

Last month, Hazleton, Pennsylvania, and Farmers Branch, Texas, asked the Supreme Court to hear cases challenging city ordinances that make it illegal for landlords to rent to undocumented immigrants. Both cities say that the high court should uphold their local laws, which have been struck down in lower courts, because a US appeals court recently upheld similar legislation passed by the town of Fremont, Nebraska.

But immigrant advocates say that the two cities’ laws are doomed because they are very similar to Arizona’s draconian immigration law, passed in 2010, which also criminalized being an immigrant. The Supreme Court invalidated most of the provisions of Arizona’s statute in June 2012 because they interfered with the federal government’s authority over immigration. Both the Hazleton and Farmers Branch laws were struck down by lower courts for this precise reason.

“The Supreme Court spoke clearly in the Arizona decision about overriding the federal role of immigration enforcement,” says Sam Brooks of the Souther Poverty Law Center’s Immigrant Justice Project. Not only are these types of laws likely unconstitutional, he adds, they encourage racial profiling by community members worried about giving leases to the wrong people.

Other towns have proposed laws that would stop landlords from renting to undocumented immigrants. San Bernardino, California, was the first to consider such a law in 2006. It was eventually voted down. Valley Park, Missouri, enacted this type of ordinance in 2006. It was challenged twice but upheld by a federal court in 2008. Scores of other municipalities and states have considered legislation that mimics the city housing ordinances and Arizona’s law.

Most of the anti-immigrant statutes can be traced back to one man: Kris Kobach, the secretary of state of Kansas and chief counsel at the conservative Immigration Law Reform Institute (ILRI). Kobach helped craft the laws in Arizona, Hazleton, Farmers Branch, Fremont, and Valley Park, and has defended them in court.

ILRI is the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which was founded by John Tanton, an English-only advocate who has ties to white supremacists.

Link:

These Cities Are Trying to Bully Undocumented Immigrants Out of Town

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These Cities Are Trying to Bully Undocumented Immigrants Out of Town

House Passes GOP Bill That Could Curb Civil Rights Lawsuits

by BerndHugg Posted on November 18, 2013

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last week, the House passed a GOP bill that would slap fines on people who file “frivolous lawsuits”—like that one against the Weather Channel for failing to predict a storm. Except that the bill could also discourage Americans from filing civil rights lawsuits, according to Democrats who oppose the bill.

The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act, which was introduced by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), passed the House 228 to 195, with only three Democrats voting in favor. It would require courts to fine attorneys for bringing suits that are intended to harass the defendant, or whose claims are not based on fact or existing law, or are not backed by a legitimate argument for establishing new law.

“Lawsuit abuse is common in America because the lawyers who bring these frivolous cases have everything to gain and nothing to lose,” Smith said when the bill passed. He and fellow Republicans say that frivolous lawsuits waste thousands of court hours and cost companies billions of dollars each year.

But Democrats say the bill would have dangerous side effects. Smiths’ bill could also make it harder for people to successfully bring civil rights lawsuits, they say, because these cases often hinge on new types of legal issues—such as transgender rights—making them more vulnerable to being shot down as invalid by a court. (Earlier this month, House Speaker John Boehner called discrimination lawsuits brought by LGBT individuals “frivolous“.) Victims of discrimination may be less likely to file suit if they know they could be penalized for doing so.

The bill “will turn the clock back to a time when federal rules of civil procedure discouraged civil rights cases and limited judicial discretion,” House judiciary committee ranking member John Conyers (D-Mich.) told The Hill after the bill passed, adding that the legislation would “have a disastrous impact on the administration of justice.”

So, it’s a good thing Smith’s bill isn’t going anywhere. The White House opposes it, and the Senate is unlikely to take the legislation up for a vote.

Continue reading here:

House Passes GOP Bill That Could Curb Civil Rights Lawsuits

Posted in FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Smith's, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on House Passes GOP Bill That Could Curb Civil Rights Lawsuits

Environmental, conservative, media organizations rank our lovable Congress

by N0bodyh56 Posted on February 22, 2013

Environmental, conservative, media organizations rank our lovable Congress

By Philip Bump

This place.

It is awards season, everyone! For cool people (well, cooler people than me) that means it’s time for the distribution of Grammys and Emmys and Oscars and Whatevers. For other people, it’s awards and accolades strewn upon Capitol Hill, meaning the various ratings of members of Congress by media entities and advocacy organizations.

It is, as I have analogized previously, like the trophies given out at the end of a season to kids in a youth basketball league, except some of the awards come from the coaches and others come from fawning parents. Like youth basketball awards, these accolades will sit on shelves in the corners of rooms for a few years and eventually be thrown out.

Anyway, here they are.

The League of Conservation Voters

Every year, the LCV ranks how members of the House and Senate vote on issues related to the environment. How did those august bodies fare this year, LCV?

From an environmental perspective, the best that can be said about the second session of the 112th Congress is that it is over. Indeed, the Republican leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives continued its war on the environment, public health, and clean energy throughout 2012, cementing its record as the most anti-environmental House in our nation’s history. …

The good news is that while the U.S. House voted against the environment with alarming frequency, both the U.S. Senate and the Obama administration stood firm against the vast majority of these attacks. There are 14 Senate votes included in the 2012 Scorecard, many of which served as a sharp rebuke of the House’s polluter-driven agenda.

Very, very surprising, I’m sure you’ll agree.

The LCV also made little maps, so you can see which states hate the Earth the most. Here’s the House, which really hates the Earth a lot.

LCV

And the Senate, which hates it a little less.

LCV

You can see at the bottom there the average vote for each body: The House voted the right way on environmentally important legislation 42 percent of the time; the Senate did 56 percent. Nice work, everyone. You can also see how that compares to other congresses in this graph.

LCV

The terrible House has gotten terribler recently which, again, is completely unsurprising.

But no one cares how each team did. People want to know about the players. Who was the most environmentally friendly member of the House? Was it Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio)? Was it Rep. Paul Ryan (R-VP)? No, it was not either of those guys! Eight House members had perfect scores: Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Woolsey (D-Calif.), Stark (D-Calif.), Honda (D-Calif.), Capps (D-Calif.), Polis (D-Col.), Quigley (D-Ill.), Markey (D-Mass.). Nice work, everyone. Here is a small trophy to put in your district office.

Here’s the full scorecard [PDF], which should be used for betting purposes.

The National Journal and some conservative group

Remember how this article was about awards season? Yes, it’s still about that.

The Huffington Post runs down (in both senses) these other accolades.

Every year, the National Journal determines the ideological standouts from within the Democratic and Republican caucuses in the House and Senate. It takes the “roll-call votes in the second session of the 112th Congress,” and sorts through them until it has identified the ones that put the ideological differences between the parties in the sharpest relief. The Journal checks who voted for what on those occasions, subjects those votes to statistical analysis, assigns weights “based on the degree to which it correlated with other votes in the same issue area,” and factors in the various absences and abstentions. Finally, they cut the head off the duck and watch the duck’s dying torso stagger around a Ouija board while listening to Enya. Ha, just kidding, I made up the part that actually sounds like it might have been fun!

At any rate, after all is said and done, the Journal arrives at results. And so, without further ado, your 2012 winners:

– Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) is the most conservative senator.

– Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) tied for the most liberal senator.

– Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) is the most conservative member of the House (like you couldn’t have guessed that).

– And a whole mess of Democratic representatives have tied for the most liberal member of the House. They are Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), Pete Stark (D-Calif.), Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), John Olver (D-Mass.), Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), John Lewis (D-Ga.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Mike Honda (D-Calif.), Donna Edwards (D-Md.), Danny Davis (D-Ill.), John Conyers (D-Mich.), William Lacy Clay (D-Mo.), Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), and I promise you that is it.

And some conservative group gave awards!

Those who score 100 percent on the [that group’s] scale get recognized as a “Defender of Liberty.” This year, the senators earning that distinction are: Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.).

The similarly honored House members are Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), Diane Black (R-Tenn.), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Paul Broun (R-Ga.), Dan Burton (R-Ind.), Mike Conaway (R-Texas), Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), John Fleming (R-La.), Bill Flores (R-Texas), Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), Scott Garrett (R-N.J.), Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Tom Graves (R-Ga.), Wally Herger (R-Calif.), Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.), Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Jeff Landry (R-La.), Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), Pete Olson (R-Texas), Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), Bill Posey (R-Fla.), Tom Price (R-Ga.), Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.), Todd Rokita (R-Ind.), Ed Royce (R-Calif.), Steve Scalise (R-La.), David Schweikert (R-Ariz.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.), and Joe Wilson (R-S.C.).

The LCV rankings for the senators were 35. In sum. Cumulatively. I didn’t bother to add up those for the House, but it was probably the same grand total.

My personal rankings

Everyone got a 100 percent and a pizza party.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

View original post here – 

Environmental, conservative, media organizations rank our lovable Congress

Posted in GE, Hoffman, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Environmental, conservative, media organizations rank our lovable Congress

House Republican politicking is obviously more fun than supporting Sandy victims

by biglermyrta910 Posted on January 11, 2013

House Republican politicking is obviously more fun than supporting Sandy victims

By Philip Bump

According to House Speaker John Boehner’s master plan, the House will next week consider the other $51 billion in Sandy relief funding that it punted on earlier this month.

House Republicans will absolutely not approve all of it. The question is how much they’ll sign off on. With a coda for pessimists: if any.

drpavloff

Advertising distribution mechanism Politico.com outlines how the vote is expected to go.

First, the House plans to call up a bill by Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) that totals $27 billion in relief. Then, it will immediately amend the bill to deduct the $9.7 billion in flood relief passed before Congress recessed — bringing the bill’s total to $17 billion.

Amendments will be allowed — including spending reduction amendments — and then the House will vote on passage of the Rogers amendment. This would set up $17 billion to be sent to the Senate.

But then leadership will allow Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.) to offer an amendment that offers an additional $33 billion. Republicans think this can pass as well.

But efforts by Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), who abstained from voting for John Boehner for speaker, could change the equation.

The South Carolinian has already offered multiple amendments seeking spending offsets, which if made in order could seriously complicate the pledge of Majority Leader Eric Cantor to move the legislation quickly.

Smart precedent by a representative of a state whose most tourist-friendly city lies right on the Atlantic Ocean.

House Republicans are particularly concerned about measures in the package that don’t go directly to providing aid to the affected and displaced. Among those measures are ones meant to ameliorate future storms: to improve prediction ability, to bolster federal facilities, to encourage smarter reconstruction in affected areas. Given that Republican members of the House are far more interested in symbolic penny-pinching (particularly when it can screw over East Coast libruls), much of that will likely end up on the House floor. So to speak.

It’s been noted with some regularity that an aid package of $60 billion was authorized by Congress 10 days after Hurricane Katrina. Superstorm Sandy was 75 days ago. Meaning that private relief services have dried to a trickle while public ones are increasingly strained. For example, housing aid, as reported by the Huffington Post:

Nearly 1,000 Long Island households displaced by superstorm Sandy are waiting to find out whether their federal funding for hotel rooms will be extended beyond Sunday.

That’s the current “checkout date” for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s transitional sheltering assistance program, a spokesman for the agency said. However, the spokesman, John Mills, said Thursday that a decision about whether to extend the program could be made by the end of the day Friday.

Roughly 970 Long Island households — individuals or entire families — are staying in hotel rooms funded by the program, Mills said. Statewide, the program currently funds hotel rooms for about 2,360 households, he said.

There are two bright spots in this story. The first is that the “checkout” date has already been extended twice. The second is that FEMA is the only federal agency to have received aid from the Sandy bill the House passed last week — but just enough to keep it solvent.

Nonetheless, the checkout-date dilemma highlights the larger problem. The Sandy hourglass is down to its last few grains. More and more of the families that have spent nearly 11 weeks patching their lives back together will be unable to do so without help. Support is needed. Has been needed. And with each day that passes, we are 24 hours closer to another hurricane season for which the East Coast is only more vulnerable than before.

Update: FEMA extended the residency deadline until January 26.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Cities

,

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continue at source:  

House Republican politicking is obviously more fun than supporting Sandy victims

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on House Republican politicking is obviously more fun than supporting Sandy victims

The new head of the House Science Committee is indifferent to science

by Myrna Posted on November 28, 2012

The new head of the House Science Committee is indifferent to science

By Philip Bump

In 2009, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) made a funny joke.

“ABC, CBS and NBC Win Lap Dog Award,” a press release from his office touted. “The networks have shown a steady pattern of bias on climate change,” the funny “award” announcement (it was sarcastic!) read. “During a six-month period, four out of five network news reports failed to acknowledge any dissenting opinions about global warming, according to a Business and Media Institute study.” He was incensed that the networks didn’t cover the dumb, fake “Climategate” “scandal,” which they didn’t because it was dumb and fake.

Lamar Smith put out that press release because he toes the Republican Party line on climate change: It’s not our fault. It’s not the fault, for example, of the oil and gas industry, which has contributed half a million dollars to Smith over his career. His website carefully tiptoes around causation, stating that the “Earth has undergone tremendous change in the past and is experiencing similar change now.”

It is only natural, then, that Smith should be the GOP’s choice to lead the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

ryanjreilly

From The Huffington Post:

On Tuesday afternoon, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) announced that the Republican Steering Committee had recommended Smith as the new chairman. The full House GOP caucus will vote on all chairmanships Wednesday and is expected to ratify the steering panel’s choices. …

[Smith] also referred to environmentalists and others who warn about the seriousness of the issue as “global warming alarmists.”

To be fair, Smith presumably believes in both technology and the existence of space. So two out of three ain’t bad.

The amazing thing about this nomination: It could have been worse.

Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also uses Twitter a whole lot.

Read more:

Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Link to original: 

The new head of the House Science Committee is indifferent to science

Posted in GE, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The new head of the House Science Committee is indifferent to science