Why No Up or Down Vote on Drilling?

Search

Banned
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
3,981
Tokens
Stephanopoulos to Pelosi: Why No Up or Down Vote on Drilling?

Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
August 3, 2008 - 13:41 ET


It seems that even ABC's George Stephanopoulos is getting fed up with Congressional Democrats blocking efforts by Republicans to expand offshore oil drilling in order to bring down gas prices.
On Sunday's "This Week," Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Cali.) was asked repeatedly why she refuses to allow this issue to come to a vote.
The look of disgust on Stephanopoulos's face as Pelosi mumbled non sequitur after non sequitur was almost more telling of his sense of frustration than the number of times he asked virtually the same question: "Why won't you permit a straight up or down vote?"
Readers should prepare themselves for an alternate reality, for Madame Speaker was quizzed on Sunday like never before (video available here, rush transcript from closed captioning, photo courtesy ABC News):

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, HOST: You've been getting a lot of heat for not allowing a straight up or down vote expanding drilling off the coasts of the United States. Why won't you permit a straight up or down vote?
NANCY PELOSI, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: What we have presented are options that will really make a difference at the pump. Free our oil, Mr. President. We're sitting on 700 million barrels of oil. That would have an immediate effect in ten days. What our colleagues are talking about is something that won't have an effect for ten years and it will be 2 cents at the time. If they want to present something that's part of an energy package, we're talking about something. But to single shoot on something that won't work and mislead the American people as to thinking it's going to reduce the price at the pump, I'm just not going to be a part of it.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Except it’s not just Republicans that are calling for this. Members of your own caucus say we must have a vote. Congressman Jason Altmire, let me show our viewers right now, says, “There is going to be a vote. September 30 will not come and go without a vote on the opening the Outer Continental Shelf. The message has been delivered. The issue can't be ignored any longer.” He says he speaks for a lot of Democrats. He's talked to the leadership and a vote must happen.
PELOSI: Maybe it will, as part of a larger energy package. Let's step back, call a halt and put this in perspective. What we have now is a failed energy policy by the Bush/Cheney, two oilmen in the White House. $4 a gallon gasoline at the pump. And what they're saying is let's have more of the same. Let's have more of big oil making, record profits, historic profits. You see the quarterly reports that just came out, who want to be subsidized who don't really want to compete. Let them use the subsidies to drill oil in protected areas. Instead we're saying, free the oil. Use it, don't lose it. There's 68 million acres in lower 48 and 20 million more acres in Alaska where they're permitted where they could drill anytime. This is a diversionary tactic from failed energy policies.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But if you feel you have the better arguments, why not give a straight up or down vote for drilling?
PELOSI: Because the misrepresentation is being made that this is going to reduce the price at the pump. This is again a decoy, it’s not a solution.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, if you’re right, why not let it be debated out and have the vote?
PELOSI: We have a debate every single day on this subject. What you saw in the Congress this week was the war dance of the hand maidens of the oil companies. That's what you saw on the Republican side of the aisle. Democrats and Republicans are not right there on party lines on this issue. There are regional concerns, as well as some people concerned about what this means back home for them. But we have a planet to save. We have an economy to grow. And we can do that if we keep our balance in all of this and not just say but for drilling in unprotected and these protected areas offshore, we would have lower gas prices.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So what exactly are you trying to say? You say you might allow a vote as part of a comprehensive package, but you won’t allow a vote on --
PELOSI: We have put on the floor. Free our oil. Strong bipartisan support for that. Use it, don't lose it. Strong bipartisan support for that. End undue speculation, strong bipartisan support for that. We've talked about these things. Invest in renewable energy resources so that we can increase the supply of energy for our country. Strong bipartisan support for that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Yet you brought those measures to the floor in a way under the suspension of the rules so that it couldn't be amended with a drilling proposal.
PELOSI: Well, we built consensus and have a strong bipartisan. This is what’s going to make a difference to reduce the dependence on foreign oil, to stop our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. To increase the supply of energy immediately to reduce the price at the pump to protect the consumer. So this is a policy matter. This is very serious policy matter. It's not to use a tactic of one -- one tactic in order to undermine a comprehensive energy package to reduce our dependence on foreign oil which is a national security issue. To reduce our dependence on fossil fuels in our own country. Now, will we be talking about natural gas that's cheaper, better for the environment --
STEPHANOPOULOS: But why not allow votes on all that? When you came in as Speaker you promised in your commitment book "A New Direction for America," let me show our viewers, you said that “Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, fair debate consisting of full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives.” If they want to offer a drilling proposal, why can't they have a vote?
PELOSI: They'll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote and then they may get a vote. What I am trying to, we have serious policy issues in our country. The President of the United States has presented this but for this our economy would be booming. But for this, gas would be cheaper at the pump. It's simply not true. Even the President himself in his statement yesterday and before then has said, there is no quick fix for this by drilling.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Obama has agreed with you. He says, listen. This is not the answer. Drilling is not the answer. But he said over the weekend that he might be willing to sign onto drilling as part of a comprehensive proposal.
PELOSI: What Senator Obama said is what we want a President to say. Let's look at all of the options. Let's compare them. And let's see what really does increase our supply. Protect our environment, save our economy, protect the consumer, instead of a single shot thing that does none of the above. Why we give subsidies to big oil to drill instead of letting them --
STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to move on to other issues. Just to be clear, you are saying you will not allow a single up or down vote on drilling. But you will allow a vote on a package that includes drilling?
PELOSI: No, what I'm saying to you is, as far as I'm concerned, unless there is something that -- you never say never to anything. You know, people have their parliamentary options available to them. But from my standpoint, my flagship issue as Speaker of the House and 110th Congress has been to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reverse global warming. I'm not giving the gavel -- I'm not giving a gavel away to a tactic that will do neither of those things. That supports big oil at the cost and expense of the consumer.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So you’re not going to permit a vote, you may get beat, but you're not going to permit a vote on your own?
PELOSI: Again, we take this one step at a time. But while we're spending all of this time on a parliamentary tactic when nothing less is at stake than the planet, the air we breathe, our children breathe.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But that’s what I don’t understand. If you could get votes on everything else that you care about which you say there is strong bipartisan support, why not allow a vote on the drilling as well?
PELOSI: Because the President will not allow any of these other things to go forth. Why are we not saying to the President, why don't you release oil from the SPR in ten days to have the price at the pump go down? Why are you opposed to any undue speculation in the oil markets? Why do you not insist that people who have leases on our land with permits ready to go use those? The oil companies don't want competition. And what we would do by saying, go ahead, give them the subsidies. Allow them to drill in areas that are protected now, instead of where they're allowed to drill, is to diminish all of the opportunity that we have for an electricity standard for our country. Where we set out standards that makes the competition for renewable energy resources better. Which says to the private sector, invest here because there is a standard that they have to honor. If you just say it's drill, drill, drill, drill and we're going to subsidize it, what is the motivation for the private sector to come in and say we're going to support these renewable energies, wind, solar, biofuels. Plug-in cars. Natural gas and other alternatives.
Although Stephanopoulos never addressed the revolt that happened in the House on Friday when Pelosi adjourned the session for a five week vacation, he is to be commended for doing a fairly good grilling on Sunday.
As for Pelosi, Americans should be embarrassed by her disgraceful performance. If she represents the best House Democrats have to offer at this moment in history, we should all be fearful of the future.
 

Everything's Legal in the USofA...Just don't get c
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
2,199
Tokens
This woman in the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United States is as glaring an example of the Peter Principle as you're ever going to see.
 

Pro Handi-Craper My Picks are the shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
4,098
Tokens
Pelosi is a terrorist. What will homeland security do about it?

Terrorism is "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion."[2] There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[3][4] Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety.


Gas at the price of $10 a GALLON WILL PUT FEAR INTO EVERYONE.
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
the marketplace will take care of the problem

only reason oil prices are "high" is because we can't afford them

so therefore consumption will shrink prices will fall and there we go problem fixed

nobody was flipping from SUVs to smart cars back in may of 2007 when gas was above 3 bucks a gallon cause they could still use homes as ATMS and rack up CC debt

gas and oil prices will become a minimal issue going forward (at least on the near term next 1-3 years) as the economic gloom and doom spreads its wings

long term that's probably a different story
 

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
33,178
Tokens
She is to pompous and wealthy to understand what the struggling people are feeling and dealing with. She thinks it is all about her. I don't like her much. She does not get it at all.

:toast:
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,117
Tokens
partisan politics
 

Banned
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
3,981
Tokens
dem-gas-plan.jpg
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
that's not the democrat's plan

that's the free markets in action

regardless of repub or dem

people turning in their keys to SUVs in trade for a small more fuel efficient car due to the economic conditions

nobody is forcing them too other than the economy at work....

if people can afford big gas guzzling SUVs so be it....but alot of the was based on the farse of recent past....easy credit....but i'll stop my tangent there.....
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
Pelosi is a terrorist. What will homeland security do about it?

Terrorism is "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion."[2] There is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism.[3][4] Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety.


Gas at the price of $10 a GALLON WILL PUT FEAR INTO EVERYONE.

only way gas is 10 dollars a gallon anytime in the near future

is if they manage to find a way to sending us into a hyperinflationary zimbabwe type direction

chances of that very slim at this point in time

oil down another 4 bucks today to 121

the gloom and doom takes no prisoners whether its banks or oil producers (exxon at 52 week lows)

and low oil, lower prices.... taken as a big picture is bad news for the economy....means the global economy is sluggish and contracting
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
87,117
Tokens
Everybody hates $4 gasoline. Everybody wants to be independent of foreign oil. Two no-brainers in a row. Here’s the brain teaser: What’s the preferred solution? This is where the political rhetoric gets downright laughable…
Q: Why is the oil price so high?
A: Because of those greedy speculators.
Q: To get the price down, should we drill more in our own territory?
A: No, of course not; that wouldn’t yield oil for years.
Q: But wouldn’t that new policy cause the speculators to start bidding the oil price down?
A: There’s no guarantee it would drop immediately.
Q: Is there a guarantee is wouldn’t drop immediately?
A: The only guarantee is that energy from wind and solar is cleaner than energy from oil; shifting to wind and solar power is the right energy policy.
Q: Will wind-generated electricity be available for powering our cars sooner than gasoline from increased domestic oil production?
A: If we don’t start a bigger push for wind and solar power now, we’re just prolonging our dependence on oil.
Q: But if we don’t change oil drilling policy now, won’t we just prolong higher than necessary oil prices?
A: Forget oil, we need to kick that habit.
Q: But isn’t today’s pressing problem the high price of gasoline?
A: You don’t get it, do you? We won’t NEED gasoline if we switch to wind and solar power.
Q: Gasoline is a liquid fuel that goes into my gas tank; each tank gives me 300 miles worth of driving. If I shift from gasoline to electricity from the grid, how will I store that much electricity in my car?
A: In rechargeable batteries, dummy; plug-in cars. Where have you been?
Q: But today’s best batteries take up a lot more room than my gas tank, only give me a hundred miles of driving, take hours to recharge, wear out with usage, and make the car cost thousands of dollars more. Not many of us consumers can afford all that money and hassle. Can’t we just drill for more oil here, using current technology, to give consumers a break on gasoline prices?
A: No, we need to kick the oil habit. What we need is a breakthrough in new technology--a superbattery of some kind that’s as affordable and safe as a tankful of gasoline, yields the same mileage per tankful, and recharges quickly from the power grid.
Q: Okay, okay, we need a superbattery, and we need it quickly. Could government energy policy help reduce the time it would take to get us to that breakthrough?
A: Of course it could; how long have I been trying to tell you that government should be doing a lot more to force us to kick our addiction to oil? Sheesh.
Q: How much would it be worth to our economy if a superbattery breakthrough eventually displaced our need for foreign oil?
A: Hundreds of billions per year, even trillions of dollars. And, we could become a superbattery exporter instead of an oil importer.
Q: Okay, I get it. But if we’re going to give consumers a break from high-priced gasoline, and we’re not going to allow any more drilling, we’ll need that superbattery as soon as possible, won’t we?
A: Duh.
Q: But to encourage entrepreneurs, scientists, and companies to get moving a lot faster towards that superbattery breakthrough, the government will need to set up some kind of new incentive, won’t it?
A: Of course; I’ve been trying to tell you all along that government energy policy needs to change in a big way.
Q: How about something like an “X-prize” for a new superbattery? Maybe a few hundred million dollar prize for the first entrepreneur, or company, or group of scientists to come through with the new technology?
A: Uhhh… No, no, we couldn’t do that. Uhhh… that’s McCain’s idea… obviously just a “gimmick” (...according to these talking points they sent me...).
Q: What’s your solution, then?
A: Don’t worry. Obama promised “change.” He’ll figure it out, just trust him.
Q: Could you please get a little more specific?
A: Sorry, I’m out of time. Gotta go fill up my car before gasoline goes higher.
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
i give up LOL

by the way just took a smoke break and saw somebody driving down the road in a spaceage looking golfcart type thing

might be electric sounded like it....

the markets at work boyz
 

RX Senior
Joined
Apr 20, 2002
Messages
47,431
Tokens
We should just continue to depend on oil, and drill for oil here without any regard to our land and wildlife. And if that doesn't work, we just blame Pelosi! Or we can fault the democrats.

I don't care that Exxon is raking in record profits. In fact, I'm happy about it. It gives me something to root for when the Red Sox aren't ahead in the standings.

That is right my fellow Americans. Do what it takes to possibly lower gas by 10 cents or so, and we can put all
bi-partisanship aside.
 

the bear is back biatches!! printing cancel....
Joined
Mar 31, 2006
Messages
24,692
Tokens
exxon profits aren't bad rob funk

they pay a shit ton of taxes to government

and all their workers and shareholders have more money to participate in the economy as a whole

eat out at mom and pop restaurants, buy cars, buy homes, buy whatever...

exxon's stock price crumbling is bad for the economy just like any other equity now that it looks like those profits will be shrinking

and there will be less new exploration jobs at exxon, they will be paying less taxes, and spending less money in the economy

high gas prices are only high because we can't afford them or we can't afford to consume as much as we currently are!!!

every fucking issue gets clouded between left and right talking about nonsense about what they should be doing to "help us"

government can't fix your problems....the free markets can

obama 1000 dollar check curtosy of exxon is the biggest pile of shit i've ever seen

all it will do is help gas prices stay higher than the would otherwise be in the free market....the stupidity of our government and people in general just astounds me sometimes
 

Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,905
Tokens
lol

essentially dum fuks, ill informed and generally morons...

even mention less blame oil corporations....its downright communist.

The profit is no higher relatively then a company named Coca- Cola

US companies in general already experience the highest corporate tax on the planet.

What crooks.

Oil companies employ a hell of a lot of people

get a clue

as for alternative vs domestic drilling

they do not need to be in opposition
 

New member
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
641
Tokens
Say we drill tomorrow, where are we going to put all that oil? We don't have enough refineries. One more thing, the oil that is drilled, why do you think it will stay in the US and not go on the world market, to the highest bidder?


There are plenty of reasons gas costs so much, but one of them is that the United States doesn't have enough refineries. The National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association says that the last new refinery built in the United States was Marathan Ashland's Garyville, La., plant—and it was completed in 1976. According to this report, between 1999 and 2002 refining capacity in the United States rose only 3 percent, squeezing up prices since demand grew much faster than that.
 

Militant Birther
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
11,836
Tokens
lol

essentially dum fuks, ill informed and generally morons...

even mention less blame oil corporations....its downright communist.

The profit is no higher relatively then a company named Coca- Cola

US companies in general already experience the highest corporate tax on the planet.

What crooks.

Oil companies employ a hell of a lot of people

And yet Obama wants to raise corporate taxes AND the capital gains tax. What do you think that will do to the economy and American jobs, Sen Dufus? :ohno:

get a clue

The Pelosi-Reid-Obama Don't Drill Democrats don't have a clue!

tiregauge.jpg


Obama's energy policy: inflate your tires, turn out the lights and pray for wind.

Actually, this is what his website says:
  • Increase Fuel Economy Standards
  • Invest in Developing Advanced Vehicles
  • Build Biofuel Distribution Infrastructure
  • Build More Livable and Sustainable Communities

No drilling. No nuclear power. No new energy sources. In other words, heaps upon heaps of socialism and mandated rationing!

:puke1:
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,809
Messages
13,573,442
Members
100,871
Latest member
Legend813
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com