Tag Archives: democrats

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

There Will Be No Congressional Fix For Canceled Health Care Policies

by Gwenn Record Posted on November 15, 2013

Mother Jones

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

This is just a quick note to anyone who’s worried and/or hopeful that Congress will pass some kind of legislative fix for people whose health insurance has been canceled due to Obamacare. It won’t happen. Republicans are interested only in Obamacare’s failure and will refuse to support any Democratic bill that genuinely addresses the problem. Conversely, Democrats are interested only in improving Obamacare and relieving the political pressure they’re feeling. They will refuse to support any Republican bill that contains an obvious poison pill. Unless I’m missing something, the intersection of these two positions is the null set. Thus, there is no bill that can pass Congress.

This is not a joke. No one should waste any time reporting or commenting on the various bills that are likely to pop up over the next few weeks. It’s all just posturing. Obama’s regulatory fix is the only one we’re going to get.

This article is from: 

There Will Be No Congressional Fix For Canceled Health Care Policies

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on There Will Be No Congressional Fix For Canceled Health Care Policies

The Tea Party Really Isn’t Anything Very New

by Mike Herman Posted on November 13, 2013

Mother Jones

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

Rick Perlstein writes in the Nation this week that the Tea Party is nothing new. Conservative insurgencies have been part of the Republican firmament since at least the 1950s, and every one of them has roughly the same goals, roughly the same motivations, and roughly the same apocalyptic view of politics. Regular readers know that I agree with this, so I was naturally nodding along as I read Perlstein’s piece. I also nodded along at this, which comes after a passage in which Perlstein is dumbfounded that liberals still seem surprised by the fervor of reactionary groups like the Tea Party:

This time, liberals are also making a new mistake. Call it “racial defeatism.” Folks throw their hands up and say, “Of course reactionary rage is going to flow like mighty waters against an African-American president! What can we possibly do about that?” But it’s crucial to realize that the vituperation directed at Obama is little different from that aimed at John F. Kennedy, who was so hated by the right that his assassination was initially assumed by most observers to have been done by a conservative; or Bill Clinton, who was warned by Helms in 1994 that if he visited a military base in North Carolina, he’d “better have a bodyguard.”

All right-wing antigovernment rage in America bears a racial component, because liberalism is understood, consciously or unconsciously, as the ideology that steals from hard-working, taxpaying whites and gives the spoils to indolent, grasping blacks. Racial rhetoric has been entwined with government from the start, all the way back to when the enemy was not Obamacare but the Grand Army of the Republic….Every time the government acts to expand the prerogatives of citizenship and economic opportunity to formerly disenfranchised groups, a racism-soaked backlash ensues. Defeatism—or ideological accommodation—only makes it worse.

I don’t doubt for a second that the racial component of the latest right-wing fluorescence is stronger because Obama is black. But it’s only modestly stronger, and you hardly need to go back to JFK to see this. It’s easy to think of Bill Clinton today as a cuddly, beloved elder statesman, but anyone over the age of 40 knows that Clinton lived through an eruption of right-wing rage that was every bit as bad as what Obama has gone through. Even the specific obsessions of the wingers weren’t even very different. Health care socialism? Check. Economy-killing taxes? Check. Gay rights destroying America as we know it? Check. Supposed juvenile drug use? Check. Endless faux scandals and corruption? Check. Government shutdown? Check. Deficit hysteria? Check. Ball-busting wife? Check. The similarities, frankly, are pretty stunning.

The differences are on the margin. There were no birthers in the 90s, but there were all the black babies Clinton supposedly fathered. There was no Benghazi, but there was Black Hawk Down. There was no Solyndra or Fast & Furious, but there was Mena airfield and Monica’s blue dress. You work with what you have, so the details are always going to be different. But the melody is pretty much the same.

Tea partiers don’t hate Obama because he’s black, they hate him because he’s a Democrat, and Democrats are forever taking away their money and giving it to the indolent. And while being black probably hurts Obama a bit with this crowd in a way that Clinton avoided, being a philanderer hurt Clinton in a way that Obama has avoided. In the end, I suspect it’s mostly a wash. Perlstein is right: Obama was destined to be hated by the reactionary right no matter what.

Jump to original:  

The Tea Party Really Isn’t Anything Very New

Posted in alo, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Tea Party Really Isn’t Anything Very New

Elizabeth Warren Slams Regulators for Keeping Banks “Too Big to Fail”

by KirkM79lwwbk Posted on November 12, 2013

Mother Jones

Five years after the financial crash, most congressional Democrats seem content to live with the status quo. They tackled financial reform in 2010 when they passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and they’d prefer to leave the nitty-gritty details of keeping banks in check to federal agencies rather than pass new legislation.

But Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) won’t be so easily assuaged. On Tuesday, she delivered a speech to a room full of academics, consumer advocates, and senate aides, that criticized federal regulators for failing to meet the deadlines to write rules regulating banks, as outlined in Dodd-Frank. “Since when does Congress set deadlines, watch regulators miss most of them, and then take that failure as a reason not to act?” she said. “I thought that if the regulators failed, it was time for Congress to step in. That’s what oversight means. And that’s certainly a principle that would have served our country well prior to the crisis.”

She noted that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the agency she conceived of and helped guide to formation, has met its deadlines for writing rules. But the other federal agencies have been an utter failure at keeping to the schedule laid out by Dodd-Frank. A recent report by Davis Polk found that 60 percent of deadlines had been missed. Thirty percent of Dodd-Frank-mandated rules haven’t even been proposed yet, let alone finalized.

Warren spoke at an event assessing the state of financial reform hosted by Americans for Financial Reform (AFR) and the Roosevelt Institute. The two organizations released a 125-page report Tuesday outlining where Dodd-Frank has succeeded and failed, with a heavy emphasis on where the act failed to tame the biggest banks’ risky activities and how they still expose the entire economy to risk should they collapse.

Continue Reading »

Link:

Elizabeth Warren Slams Regulators for Keeping Banks “Too Big to Fail”

Posted in alo, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Elizabeth Warren Slams Regulators for Keeping Banks “Too Big to Fail”

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

by turystycznypbs2 Posted on November 5, 2013

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

By

Shutterstock

It’s an off-year election so there are no congressional races today, but some state and local battles are of immense interest to environmentalists. Here’s a quick rundown of the key green fights to keep an eye on:

Virginia governor’s race

In the gubernatorial election in Virginia, the leading candidates are virtual caricatures of their political parties when it comes to climate change. The Democrat, Terry McAuliffe, is concerned about global warming and supports renewable energy. He also used to run a (now quite troubled) greentech company. The Republican, Ken Cuccinelli, is a climate skeptic who’s been trying to score political points by whining about the Democrats’ “war on coal.” Cuccinelli previously led a witch hunt of a prominent climate scientist, Michael Mann, trying, unsuccessfully, to force the University of Virginia to turn over emails and other records related to Mann’s time at the school. (You’ll never guess who Mann has been supporting in the governor’s race.)

President Obama called out Cuccinelli’s climate illiteracy while stumping on Monday for the Democrat. “It doesn’t create jobs when you go after scientists, and you try to offer your own alternative theories of how things work and engage in litigation around stuff that isn’t political,” Obama said. “It has to do with what’s true. It has to do with facts. You don’t argue with facts.”

Virginia, a coal-producing state, used to be solidly red, but in recent years it’s turned purple. The state’s voters went for Obama in 2008 and 2012, and they look very likely to lean blue in this race. McAuliffe is firmly up in the polls.

Read more about the race here and here.

Anti-fracking ballot measures in Colorado

The Colorado Oil and Gas Association has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into advertisements trying to convince residents of four Colorado cities to vote against ballot measures that would ban or suspend fracking.

Gov. John Hickenlooper, the pro-fracking Democrat who once drank fracking fluid in an attempt to demonstrate its harmlessness, claims the proposed measures in Boulder, Broomfield, Fort Collins, and Lafayette would be illegal. His administration is already suing one city, Longmont, for having the audacity to tell frackers to stay the hell away from their community.

“If you ban fracking you are essentially banning exploration and extraction of hydrocarbons,” Hickenlooper told Bloomberg during an interview about the ballot mesures. “Our state constitution guarantees people who own the mineral rights that there can be extraction from the surface to get those minerals.”

Washington GMO-labeling ballot measure

If Washington voters approve ballot initiative 522 [PDF], the state would mandate the labeling of foods containing genetically modified ingredients starting in 2015. The Washington Post reports that opponents have “raised at least $22 million, with large out-of-state food companies and agribusinesses like Monsanto, Dupont Pioneer, Coca-Cola, and Kellogg donating heavily.” Supporters have raised $8.4 million, mostly in small donations.

This is the first big state election battle over GMO labeling since Californians rejected a similar ballot measure one year ago. That election also saw tens of millions of dollars spent by large food corporations who want to keep their GMO ingredients a secret from their customers.

Read more about the initiative here.

Whatcom County council elections

Whatcom County in Washington state, a rural area in the northwestern corner of the country, has the power to determine whether a proposed $600 million coal terminal gets built. The Gateway Pacific Terminal would load coal mined in Wyoming and Montana onto ships bound for Asia. The county council will approve or reject key permits needed to construct the terminal. That’s why more than $1 million has flowed into four county council races from energy companies and environmentalists nationwide.

Read more about the race here and here.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Politics

Source:

Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, organic, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Four epic green ballot battles to watch today

Most Tea Partiers think warming is “just not happening”

by adndseu13da Posted on November 4, 2013

Most Tea Partiers think warming is “just not happening”

By

Shutterstock

How many Tea Partiers does it take to swap out an incandescent lightbulb?

Nine percent of them. The rest don’t believe in energy-efficient alternatives because they haven’t figured out that humans are warming the globe. (Also, they’re pissed about FASCIST GOVERNMENT PLOTS to control their sources of illumination.)

A Pew Research Center poll of 1,504 American adults last month found that about two-thirds of Americans understand that the climate is changing. That figure has been more-or-less unchanged during the last few years of Pew polling on the subject.

More Democrats than Republicans are clued in to the reality of climate change — 84 percent of Democrats agreed that there is “solid evidence the Earth is warming,” compared with 61 percent of Republicans. But within the Republican Party, there’s about as much agreement over climate science as there was over the Tea Party-fueled federal government shutdown.

Pew Research Center

Just 25 percent of people who identify as members of the Tea Party accept that the weather is changing — and most of those thinks it’s because of “natural patterns.” From the summary of the survey results:

Among the 26% of the public who say there is no solid evidence of global warming, about as many say “it’s just not happening” (13%) as say “we just don’t know enough yet about whether the earth is getting warmer” (12%).

Opinions of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents divide into four roughly equal size groups: 23% say there is solid evidence of global warming and it is mostly caused by human activity; 19% say warming exists but is due to natural patterns; 25% see no solid evidence and say it is just not happening; 20% say there is no solid evidence but not enough is known yet.

Among Tea Party Republicans, the largest share — 41% — says that global warming is just not happening, while another 28% say not enough is known. Among non-Tea Party Republicans, just 13% say global warming is not happening and among Democrats and Democratic leaners, just 4% express this view.

Let’s see if the Tea Partiers start seeing the folly of their ways as climate change dries up the world’s tea crop.


Source
GOP Deeply Divided Over Climate Change, Pew Research Center

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Link: 

Most Tea Partiers think warming is “just not happening”

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Safer, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Most Tea Partiers think warming is “just not happening”

Wind turbine blade manufacturer hiring at whirlwind rate

by bimfwc5k Posted on October 8, 2013

Wind turbine blade manufacturer hiring at whirlwind rate

By

Courtesy of LM Wind Power

That’s a big-ass blade.

The economies of Grand Forks, N.D., and Little Rock, Ark. are being swept up in a green bonanza.

LM Wind Power, a global manufacturer of blades for wind turbines, says it doubled its U.S. workforce to 700 in August — up from 350 in April. And it says the boom will continue: It expects to employ some 1,200 people in the U.S. next year — most of them based at its factories in North Dakota and Arkansas.

In a press release, the company credited the extension late last year of the Renewable Electricity Production Tax Credit with the growth of its workforce:

“We are pleased to see that the market is improving again following a period of low activity due to uncertainty around the PTC,” said LM Wind Power’s Head of US Operations, Bill Burga Jr. “With the political framework in place, our customers are winning more business again and we are ready to serve their demand for highly efficient quality blades for the US market, adding hundreds of extra jobs. Now it is crucial that the politicians remain committed to securing a stable economic framework to enable continued industry growth and increased US employment.”

By some estimates, the wind energy sector now employs about 80,000 Americans. And the decision by LM Wind Power to boost its American operations (it has factories in 14 locations all over the world) follows an encouraging trend that we told you about in August — as wind energy expands in the U.S., more of the production associated with that expansion is occurring right here in America.

But the company’s announcement also coincides with renewed uncertainty over whether the tax credit will be renewed next year. House Republicans are calling for an end to wind power subsidies, arguing that it’s time for the industry to stand on its own feet. From a story last week in The Hill:

“We keep hearing that ‘we’re almost there’ or ‘just a little bit longer.’ But the facts state that wind power has been steadily increasing over the last 10 years, and there’s this point of saying, when does wind take off on its own?” said Rep. James Lankford (R-Okla.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Energy Policy.

An analysis from the Joint Committee on Taxation found that a one-year extension of the tax credit would cost about $6.1 billion over 10 years. A five-year extension would cost about $18.5 billion.

Democrats on the panel said that, that number paled in comparison to the billions in tax breaks and subsidies granted to the oil and gas industry each year.

“Big oil still gets subsidies even though just the biggest five oil companies … made a combined $118 billion in profits in 2012,” Rep. Jackie Speier (Calif.), the top Democrat on the subcommittee, said. “Oil and gas have received over $4.8 billion each year in government subsidies over 90 years.”

If the U.S. Treasury is going to subsidize any form of energy production, which would you rather it be — renewable and clean, or fossilized and world-endangering?


Source
LM Wind Power ramps up in the U.S., LM Wind Power
GOP questions need for wind farm tax credit, The Hill

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

View the original here:  

Wind turbine blade manufacturer hiring at whirlwind rate

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, Uncategorized, wind energy, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Wind turbine blade manufacturer hiring at whirlwind rate

Republican solution to wildfires: Sell the trees!

by rezhh8j Posted on September 24, 2013

Republican solution to wildfires: Sell the trees!

By

House Republicans have a cunning plan for tackling the wildfires that have been ravaging the American West this fire season: They want to allow loggers to haul away the trees before they burn.

No forests means no forest fires, see?

Chris Roberts

The charred aftermath of California’s Rim Fire is as vacant as the minds responsible for Congress’s new wildfire bill.

The Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act was approved mostly along party lines by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Friday. The bill would more than double logging nationwide and turn some forestlands into pasturelands.

But the bill will never become law. President Obama has vowed to veto it if it ever reaches his desk.

It’s not that it’s a bad idea to reduce fuel in the nation’s forests to help preempt wildfires. By taking a hard-line approach to fighting every wildfire, Americans have inadvertently created unnaturally incendiary conditions. Leaf litter, woody detritus, and dense stands of trees that would be cleared out by frequent fires build up, then explode into infernos. Meanwhile, scores of small trees that flourish in the absence of regular fires can damage ecosystems and hog water.

But this bill is a public giveaway to private logging interests masquerading as a fire-prevention effort. From the L.A. Times:

Republicans portrayed the bill as a jobs measure that would prop up the economies of rural counties, which would receive a fourth of the money from timber sales to help fund schools and other services.

Democrats said the bill would allow logging and road building in areas now without roads and sharply curtail public review of proposed timber-cutting projects.

Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., called the measure “overreaching,” saying it would impose mandatory production quotas for timber.

“I wish our Republican friends were more serious about funding the Forest Service and its fuel load reduction programs,” he said in an interview. “They have slashed funding year after year, even as we’ve had more severe wildfires every year.”

The National Wildlife Federation Action Fund warned that the bill would “prioritize cutting down trees above everything else – including the black bears and other wildlife that depend on forests for their food, shelter and clean water to drink.”

If Republicans were serious about taking a proactive approach to addressing the burning issue of wildfires in America, they would do something about global warming, which is helping to stoke the flames.


Source
House OKs more logging in national forests, including in California, L.A. Times

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Read more: 

Republican solution to wildfires: Sell the trees!

Posted in alo, ALPHA, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Republican solution to wildfires: Sell the trees!

EPA chief nominee clears one hurdle, but more lie ahead

by Cass Barret Posted on July 10, 2013

EPA chief nominee clears one hurdle, but more lie ahead

By John Upton

Derek Bridges

Sen. David Vitter says he’s now OK with the EPA having a leader.

Gina McCarthy is one step closer to being confirmed as administrator of the EPA, after a key Republican senator dropped his filibuster threat. But other GOP senators are still opposed, so the absurdly long wait to fill the spot — a record-breaking 146 days and counting — isn’t over yet.

McCarthy, currently assistant administrator for the EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, was nominated by President Obama for the country’s top environmental job in early March. But Republicans have blocked her confirmation, taking the opportunity to accuse the EPA of insufficient transparency, among other transgressions.

One of those obstructionists has been Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), but on Tuesday he relented, announcing on his website that he would support allowing a Senate vote on the nomination, which is expected next week:

Vitter (R-La.), top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), today said that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made major progress on the five transparency requests the EPW Republicans have been demanding throughout the Gina McCarthy nomination process. In a May 16 letter sent to the EPA, Vitter said if the EPA made progress on the requests, he intended to support handling the McCarthy nomination on the Senate floor without a filibuster. Today, he agreed to fulfill that commitment after receiving historic agreements from the EPA.

Obama administration officials hope Vitter’s volte-face will convince some of his colleagues to drop their opposition. From a Tuesday article in Politico:

It remains to be seen how yielding other Republican critics of McCarthy’s will be, although observers have said for some time that the Senate is likely to confirm her.

Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) has had a hold on McCarthy’s nomination over issues in his state. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) — who held up her nomination to head the agency’s air office in 2009 — has remained staunchly opposed to McCarthy becoming administrator, particularly because of the agency’s climate change regulations.

“We certainly hope that the caucus falls in line with Sen. Vitter and supports an up and down vote on McCarthy’s nomination,” an administration official told POLITICO on Tuesday. “I think this will certainly help move the GOP caucus.”

Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) broke into a wide smile when a POLITICO reporter told her about Vitter’s statement.

But by Wednesday morning, Politico was reporting that hurdles still remain:

Just hours after Vitter (R-La.) announced yesterday that he would not support filibustering McCarthy’s nomination, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said his long-standing hold on her remains. And several Republicans who had been seen as possible McCarthy supporters signaled this week that they’re on the fence.

Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are reportedly mulling a procedural strategy, the so-called “nuclear option,” that could see McCarthy’s nomination approved by a simple majority vote, which would circumvent opposition from the minority Republicans. “I’m hoping very much that if there is an obstruction that we will simply use our parliamentary options to get a 51-vote confirmation on her,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Excerpt from: 

EPA chief nominee clears one hurdle, but more lie ahead

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on EPA chief nominee clears one hurdle, but more lie ahead

Ed Markey, climate hawk, headed for the Senate

by znuojad5 Posted on June 26, 2013

Ed Markey, climate hawk, headed for the Senate

By Claire Thompson

Markey campaign

He’ll soon be the newest member of the U.S. Senate.

Rep. Ed Markey, who pushed climate action and clean energy during 37 years in the U.S. House, is now on his way to the U.S. Senate. As expected, he handily beat Republican businessman Gabriel Gomez in the Massachusetts special election to replace now-Secretary of State John Kerry. With more than 90 percent of the vote counted on Tuesday night, Markey was up 54 to 46 percent.

Backers of Gomez had been hoping for a repeat of Scott Brown’s 2010 special-election upset, but conditions were different then — the Tea Party was on the rise, Obamacare hung in the balance, and the left-wing establishment took it for granted that Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat would stay blue.

This time, even with Markey consistently polling as much as 10 points ahead of Gomez over the course of the two-month campaign, Democrats didn’t assume an easy win. President Obama, Vice President Biden, Michelle Obama, and Bill Clinton all campaigned with Markey in recent weeks, and Markey’s campaign released a flood of ads close to the election, spending $2.6 million total on advertising compared to Gomez’s $1.4 million.

Markey, a committed climate hawk and foe of the Keystone XL pipeline, started with a financial advantage that he maintained throughout the campaign, thanks especially to money from clean-energy interests and environmental groups, reports Politico:

The vast majority of the energy money supporting Markey has come from independent expenditures by environmental groups, which account for more than $2.6 million.

Most of that comes from various branches of the League of Conservation Voters, which have spent more than $1.6 million supporting Markey or opposing Gomez.

Coming in second is the NextGen Committee, a super PAC backed by billionaire Tom Steyer. That group, which spent most of its money on Markey’s primary contest against Stephen Lynch, has spent more than $853,000 so far.

The remainder of the outside spending came from campaigns by the Sierra Club Political Committee, the 350.org Action Fund and Environmental Majority.

Markey received direct contributions from clean energy, environmental, and utility PACs, like the Environmental Defense Action Fund and the American Wind Energy Association PAC, as well as clean-energy companies like SolarCity and NextEra. Markey also got some cash through GiveGreen, a campaign run by the League of Conservation Voters Action Fund, which helps folks donate to lawmakers considered to be environmentally friendly.

Gomez received some contributions from fossil-fuel companies, including ExxonMobil, but Markey led his opponent in energy-money contributions by a factor of 76 to 1. Many of the energy-industry PACs known for supporting Republican candidates neglected Gomez’s campaign, perhaps seeing it as a losing battle.

After all, Gomez was a Republican running in deep-blue Massachusetts, which is perhaps why he made the rare claim of being a “green Republican.” He even declared his acceptance of human-caused climate change. But his green cred stops there, according to Climate Progress:

[I]n almost every instance in which Gomez discusses the environment, it is immediately followed by an equally unwavering endorsement of the Keystone XL pipeline as a job creator, a pathway to lower energy costs, and, alarmingly, environmentally friendly. …

Beyond that, and broad proclamations of support for alternative energy, Gomez has refused to take a position on any substantial climate legislation.

On the same day as Markey’s election, Obama gave his strongest speech yet arguing for climate action, and said carbon emissions would be a key factor in his decision on Keystone XL. It’s a day for climate hawks to celebrate — and then get back to work.

Claire Thompson is an editorial assistant at Grist.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Climate & Energy

,

Politics

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Excerpt from:

Ed Markey, climate hawk, headed for the Senate

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, Dolphin, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, solar panels, Uncategorized, wind energy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Ed Markey, climate hawk, headed for the Senate