With this in mind, the New York Times has an article on the attention Rep. Perriello has drawn over his ACES vote. Money quote:
The freshman Democrat from southern Virginia, who has little name recognition outside his district and little influence over the legislation, declared a couple of weeks before the vote that he would support the bill. And so much of the media attention and lobbying efforts were on the powerful committee chairmen and a number Midwestern Democrats that seemingly held the fate of the bill in their hands.The reaction to Perriello's vote, naturally, has broken down partisan lines. While the Republicans have been using the vote to bruise Perriello for his next election, Perriello thinks this strategy might backfire:
Much has changed in two weeks.
Since Democrats squeezed out a 219-212 vote on the legislation, no single member of Congress has been the subject of as much scrutiny -- and political sparring -- as Perriello.
"These are the kinds of bills that we came to Washington to pass," Perriello said. "What I think you're seeing is a new generation of politicians that are more interested in solving the issue than scoring the political points."Of course, it's too early to tell how this vote will affect Perriello's future, to which Larry Sabato opines:
Adding that even if voters punish some Democrats in 2010, the long-term impact of the legislation will result in more voters turning away from the Republican Party. "It may not backfire [on the Republicans] next year but it will backfire over time," he said. "I think it's a short term political risk for the Democrats, but its a long-term risk for Republicans because of the national security and economic impacts."
At the moment, the energy issue is being used primarily to rile up each party's political base, Sabato said. "Democrats think the bill is terrific, and Republicans think it is awful," he said. "The battle is partly to motivate base voters for a relatively low turnout midterm election."Like it or not, that is probably a fair assessment.
7 comments:
Preference on the climate bill is definitely not partisan, and I think factions can at best be described as regional.
In Appalachia, for instance, few people on either side of the debate are happy with the bill. On the one hand, the coal industry is saying that the bill will kill the coal industry (contrary to what folks like Rick Boucher say).
On the other hand, folks who are paying attention to the science say that the bill doesn't go far enough to cut coal consumption and curb GHG emissions.
Many progressive folks now oppose the bill because of the billions of dollars in giveaways to dirty industries that harm our planet, our health, and our economy. While a majority of the folks still cheering for the bill side with the Dems, that is only because they see it as an important - if slight - first step.
peace,
faithfull
Awesome comment, J.W. I wasn't aware of the continuing, evolving reaction among progressives.
To your point, and I agree, I should have said, "reaction to the vote, generally, has broken down partisan lines."
There is one point that I don't hear anyone discussing and that is the amount of money our government spends on subsidises for imported oil. A recent story on 60 Minutes suggested the Federal Government subsidizes "big oil" about $10-12 per gallon. If you think about what it cost this country everyday to get crude oil from the fields of Saudi Arabia, through the straits of Hormuz, around the Horn of Africa, through the Gulf, up the pipeline to the local station into your pickup, all while we are fighting the costliest war in the history of the world....without these subsidies you would be paying $14-15 per gallon, if you could get it at all. Not to mention the fact, all the money leaves this country never to return, hence supporting the very people that want to "wipe us off the face of the earth". Wake up folks, Freedom is not Free. The current system we have built in this country for the last 80 years is absolutely not sustainable. It was sustainable when you had cheap abundant energy, ie....$2 gasoline. But as we have seen over the course of the last 18 months, let that price spike and the wheels of our economy fall off.
Locally produced energy would utterly transform Rural Virginia. Keeping the money local, circulating within the economy 4,5,6 sometimes up to 7 times. In economics its called an economic multiplier effect...We are sitting on an economic boon. The farmers and and independent truckstop owners could and will be the new "sheiks" of our society. My Grandfather, an old tobacco farmer, was the best businessman I knew. He would always tell me that you can't farm with a pencil, when you do you are always looking backwards. In this new economy, we need to look forward and help our country become Independent again.
Drew,
Good to comment on you again. Not taking you to task for anything in this article particularly and of course Bradley stands in direct contradiction to Rep. Perriello's vote on this bill, but as far as I know, Brad is the only declared candidate on the Republican side of the ball at the moment, and I can prove that this campaign his not used it to "bruise" anyone. In fact, if you go to reesforcongress.com, you will find that we actually gave Mr. Perriello a pass on the issue. Again, we didn't agree with his position, but the campaign rather expected to vote that way, and he did not disappoint. The issue the Rees campaign has taken on the issue are the 8 Republicans who sold their constituents' vote for 30 pieces of silver over the issue. Brad has made his position clear in the platform piece online, so I won't delve into it here, but I can assure you that this campaign has not been contacted or received money from any group running those ads, (that is not to say that we don't support them either;)).
Just thought I'd weigh in and let you know.
My Best to You and Your Readers,
Michael Ernette
Campaign Manager, Rees for Congress
HD Price, great comment. I've never heard that before. Thank you for the info.
You wouldn't by any chance be the owner of Red Birch Energy would you? Fill my car up there all the time because of your biodiesel and because it keeps my money local.
Yep....That"s me. Hey Man, I really enjoy reading your post. You keep up with local events better than all the regional newspapers put together. It's where I go find out whats happening in Southside. Thanks for all you do.
Also, I wanted to let you know that Secretary of Energy Chu and Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack will be in Blairs, Va tomorrow between 1:30 - 2:30 pm. Congressman Perriello is hosting the event and it is open to the general public. I have attached the invitation I received below.
You are invited to a Community Forum with United States Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack in Blairs, Virginia on July 18, 2009. Secretary Vilsack will be joined by Energy Secretary Steven Chu as he leads the Obama Administration’s Rural Tour – which is an opportunity to discuss the efforts by the Administration to rebuild and revitalize rural America.
At each stop on the Rural Tour, Secretary Vilsack has been listening to local residents about how USDA can assist them, and discussing solutions to the challenges facing their communities.
So please bring your thoughts, ideas and questions. Your input and participation would be greatly appreciated.
Time and Place:
1:30-2:30 pm, July 18
Buddy Mahew Farm
1501 Carter Lodge Road
Blairs, Virginia 24527
There is no ticket or RSVP needed for this event. If you have any questions, you may email ruraltour@oc.usda.gov or call us at 877-85-RURAL; 877-85-78725. Be sure to check out our website WWW.RURALTOUR.GOV and share your thoughts and ideas about the tour and rural America.
Mr. Price,
Thank you for the kind words. Are you going to go to the Blair's event tomorrow - or today depending on when you read this. I am gonna be there for my job, so if you are there, I will (re-)introduce myself. We actually met before when Mike Signer was down in the area a couple months ago.
See you tomorrow.
Post a Comment