Virginia Republicans Vote Against Comprehensive Energy Bill
By: Lowell
Published On: 9/17/2008 11:02:13 AM
What else is new? That's right, I know this is a shocker but Virginia Republicans have voted "nay" yet again to a comprehensive energy bill, even though this one even had offshore oil drilling in it AND a provision for oil shale development (both anathema to environmentalists like myself). But nooooo...even THAT wasn't good enough for Virginia Republicans like Frank Wolf, Virgil Goode, and Thelma Drake, who apparently have all decided to vote the hard-core anti-environmentalist and pro-Big Oil line no matter what, while whining that Democrats aren't "doing anything" about high oil prices (which are plummeting as we speak, by the way).
The bill passed 236-189, with 15 Republicans and 221 Democrats voting "aye." Aside from the not-so-good stuff from an environmental perspective (oil shale is particularly egregious, but most likely little of that will be developed because it's so expensive and environmentally damaging), here's the good stuff Virginia Republicans voted against last night:
*Extend tax credits for renewable energy sources
*Establish a national renewable electricity standard
*Repeal subsidies to oil companies
*Increase investment in public transit
*Encourage greater energy efficiency
So, why did Virginia Republicans vote against this bill? Apparently, they are totally in the pocket of Big Oil and will vote for nothing less than EVERYTHING ExxonMobil et al. tell them to vote for. Also, can we say "election year politics uber alles?" Pathetic.
Comments
In this case... (Clemgo3165 - 9/17/2008 12:33:19 PM)
I agree with the Republicans on at least one issue: revenue sharing. The Gulf States all benefit from a share of the profits gleaned by drilling off their shores - but the areas potentially opened by this bill (including coastal Virginia) will result in no share of the revenue to the States. Perhaps that was intentional, as few states will choose to allow offshore drilling without incentives, but I still don't appreciate it since we'll be left with the clean-up should something go wrong.
Technically (tx2vadem - 9/17/2008 6:17:28 PM)
State maritime boundaries extend only 3 nautical miles out, the rest is Federal. And the federal government already shares a boat load of money with the states on a variety of programs. And it isn't like states would be putting the money aside in a reserve fund to pay for cleanup should they need it. States want the money so they can pay for regular operating expenditures without having to justify the need to voters. They would end up being reliant on the feds to help out.
Qualifier (tx2vadem - 9/17/2008 6:26:26 PM)
Texas and Florida's extend 9 nautical miles out.
Headline: Republicans Oppose Offshore Drilling (tx2vadem - 9/17/2008 6:25:35 PM)
Republicans want to raise you energy cost. Republicans don't care about your high gas bill.
This is what Republicans want (relawson - 9/17/2008 10:33:26 PM)
http://features.csmonitor.com/...
An offshore drilling rig is visible in the background as beachgoers attend the US Open of Surfing, July 20, 2008, in Huntington Beach, Calif. (AP Photo/Ric Francis)
That looks to be at least 3 miles out. I think this picture puts into perspective what Republicans want. I would be OK with less than 50 miles - essentially I don't want to see this on the horizon. However many miles out is beyond eye-sight, that is what I would be OK with.