By now it’s a familiar pattern to those who really pay attention. Rep. Reichert (WA-08) equivocates on an issue. He refuses to take a stand on an issue that anyone can really pin to him. And then he votes against the interests of his district—and hopes nobody notices.
This time it is about big oil. Reichert recently voted against the CLEAR Act, that was in response to the BP gulf catostrophy. The act got rid of the $75 million oil spill liability cap and revamped Federal oversight of the offshore oil industry.
…[i]n addition to a number of Gulf Coast restoration and research programs, the bill also fully funds the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) at $900 million, using money generated from oil and gas drilling royalties, and closes a loophole that exempts oil and gas projects from the storm-water runoff regs under the Clean Water Act. Another major onshore reform is the removal of “categorical exclusions” used to exempt some drilling applications from environmental review on public lands.
[…]“Americans will be asking, ‘Will Senators stand with the people or the polluters?’” Todd Keller, senior manager of Public Lands Campaigns for National Wildlife Federation, said in a release.
We now know where Reichert Stands…with the polluters.
This is precisely the type of vote that Reichert could have used to make a bold statement in favor of his more-environmentally-aware-than-average constituents. Hell…he could have used this vote to do a little damage control following his embarrassing semi-private statement about pandering to the environmentalists. Instead, he voted with the Party of NO!™ (ideas) and against the interests of his constituents. Apparently, Republican obstructionism is more important to Reichert.
Fortunately, Reichert is pretty much impotent as a legislator—the act passed in the House without any acts of courage on Reichert’s part.
DimDavey is a form of congealed toxic waste. He should be declared a Superfund site.
Quick someone tell Washington Conservation Voters!
‘Reichert votes against the environment’
LOL. Quick! Someone better get twice-beaten Ditzy Darcy Burnout on it! (One of Goldy’s obsessions). I think I passed by her this A.M. standing on the side of I-5 southbound staring at a shiny discarded Coors light can, totally mesmerized with curious wonder. She needs a ride, someone better go fetch her! Didn’t she craft some drivel called the “reprehensible plan” on a cocktail napkin at one time to solve all the world’s problems or something?…. Good luck!
Whatever courage Reichert had was left with his sheriff uniform years ago.
Since this was sure to pass, I’m actually surprised Reichert didn’t use his usual strategy: vote against it in early proceedural votes designed to keep it from coming to the floor for a vote, and then change his vote in favor once that failed and it was clear it was going to pass anyway.
Perhaps Reichart realizes that he’s being watched more closely now, and this tactic doesn’t get him the milage with the environmentalists it used to?
Or maybe he feels he has to vote against this to avoid a Tea Party backlash?
Or perhaps he’s feeling a bit overconfident, now that he’s survived two close challenges and the wingnuts are all predicting a big Republican victory in November?
I’d like nothing better than to burst his balloon by having him voted out of office. But it isn’t going to be easy, the odds of unseating an incumbent member of the House are astronomical. Most house seats only change if the seat is already open, or there is a big scandal.
Reichert also refused to support the Clean Ports Act of 2010, a bill that would let the Ports address environmental pollution coming from diesel trucks. He sided with the trucking companies’ (and the Port of Seattle’s) desire for profit over environmental protections. Shocking, I know.
Actually, this issue might have some milage against the small business owners and farmers in Reichart’s district. Currently they are under considerable scrutiny by both the state and federal government to avoid having even relatively small amounts of spilled oil or gas migrate into the groundwater or the waterways. I can understand their frustration at getting hit by big fines and remediation costs for relatively small quantities, while Big Oil is allowed to a pass to allow large amounts of spillage from refinery operations into the nation’s waterways.