A couple weeks ago I challenged Rep. Dave Reichert to prove me wrong about my cynicism over his self-proclaimed moderation, by taking the lead on climate change legislation:
Indeed, not only does Reichert have the chance to cast one of the only Republican votes for this legislation, he has the unparalleled opportunity to be the lone Republican getting out in front of this bill and leading the way. He and his handlers must know that climate change legislation has overwhelming support in his district—a pro-environment, hydro-powered district less economically dependent on fossil fuels than nearly any in the nation—so if he really wants to prove his moderation and independence (not to mention his legislative competence), now’s the time to show a little leadership and help shepherd this important piece of legislation through Congress.
But I’m not holding my breath.
Well, Reichert never took the lead on this legislation, but he was one of only 8 Republicans crossing the aisle to vote for it, so credit where credit is due, I guess. Still, he followed his usual pattern of voting with his party on procedural votes (here, here and here) before flipping sides on final passage, and as CQ points out, this vote on its on own doesn’t much qualify as a profile in courage:
Most of the 52 House members who didn’t side with their party on Friday’s climate change vote represent congressional districts that backed the presidential nominee of the opposite party in last year’s election.
A lot of these members will face competitive races in 2010, and no doubt they will be brandishing this against-the-grain vote as evidence of their political independence.
He certainly will. But whether Reichert’s independence is driven by conscience or expedience remains to be seen.
He took a lot of heat from his base, who think that saving the planet from utter dystopia is a luxury we can’t afford.
Who knows what his motivation is. Maybe he really does care about the environment. Maybe it was a bargaining chip that got him some help with the Pratt River wilderness bill.
Maybe he cried with his staff.
We don’t know, but you are right, we should give credit where credit is due, and not complain that he just dealt a blow to the Delbene campaign.
So thank you, Congressman. Now, about health care…
Yes thank you Congressman. I’m not going to nit-pick his motivation or intentions. I’m just going to be glad he did the right thing.
So basically you are admitting to more tards per capita. Enjoy your new power bills. I’m going to plug in to my liberal neighbor and really teach him a lesson. He never mows that side of the house so he will never see the cord. Thank you God for air conditioning! Just kidding, but wouldn’t it be fun!
[Deleted — see HA Comment Policy]
word is reichert’s heavily invested in carbon credit-backed security default swaps. and them are good for medina.
I vote for expedience — and I’ll add an adjective: Cynical expedience. No, wait, guys like Reichert don’t even think about it, they’re just trained monkeys.
@3 “I’m going to plug in to my liberal neighbor and really teach him a lesson.”
Yes, you do strike me as the type who’d steal electricity from his neighbor. After all, you’re a Republican.
Goldy, do you think the environmental community should give him a big hug and an endorsement now for “playing well with others?”
markie @ 3
Keep ignoring global warming and advocating doing nothing and pretty soon you’ll be damned uncomfortable if you don’t get air conditioning.
Could someone tell me just how Cap & Trade will actually “save”the planet?
** And prove it ISN’T a scheme to make politicos and wall street types
rich(er) ?????? **
if there are no tarrifs against countries that don’t have similar cap and trade mechanisms, then how will this:
a) reduce world emmisions
b) create a net positive of US jobs
c) keep GDP from tanking
?
@10 Why don’t you prove it is? As the proponent of this proposition, the initial burden of proof is on you.
@11 You’ve got it ass backwards, pal. The rest of the world is asking why they should restrict their emissions if we don’t.
… see HA Comment Policy (@4) …
This is not policy. This was Goldstein launching a PMS panic attack against our beloved HNMT.
Reichart has been a green squish at least since ANWR, but Dori was wrong to blame him today for passing a bad Democrat bill. Pelosi had many or most of the 40+ Democrat no-voters by the balls. Even if Reichart and 7 other “Republicans” had voted the right way, Pelosi would have given her thong a few more twists around the nuts of needed doubtful Dems to bring them back into line.
So this is usual ugly politics. Granny and BO claim a win and send vile legislation to the Senate. 40+ Democrat no-votes get to go back to their semi-sensible districts and disclaim blame for vile legislation. Reichart gets a back pat from the vile Goldstein, and maybe a favorable paragraph from the vile Joel Connelly, and maybe a few extra votes against Darcy Plumpmuffin next year.
It’s demographic destiny: Reichart knows a contagion of idiocy has spread from the 7th to the 8th. He’s got to make libidiocy his new base if he’s going to survive.
Well, we could just stick our heads up our ass and pretend like nothing is happening. Or we can start an admittedly inadequate response but at least one that is some response, and begins a very positive process that can arrest this slide.
The repub idiocy on this goes beyond stupidity and politics, and is a mindset that threatens the planet. For a party who liked to push the “one percent theory” on threats of terrorism which only exists in Tom Clancy novels, the reality of destroying the planet does not seem to make much impression on them.
Kenny Boy and Enron (to say nothing of EnRon Sims) loved this cap’n’trade crap. I mean, look at the wingnutta asshole libshits (Roger Rabbit) on this very thread who love the most repulsive regressive tax hike we’ve ever seen.
You fat-cat plutocrat Democrats keep sticking it to us little people, and we’ll stick you on the tines of our populist pitchforks, fuzzy little phukass Roger first.
If Dave Reichert was willing to vote for the bill’s passage, maybe that means the bill was too weak.
Foss: Was a few days late to the big event in Manhattan in September 2001, so maybe all that fallout falling out of the sky was confected at KarlRove studios, and maybe Tom Clancy wrote the script.
But it was probably real, and a real prelude to something bigger and badder from the jihad action faction. Tom Clancy didn’t bring those buildings down. An insider Jewish conspiracy didn’t bring those buildings down. Even Karl Rove, the smartest geek in the room, wasn’t smart enough to bring those buildings down. Nor, alas, was President Rove smart enough to avert disaster in 2001.
But Rove, Clancy, and their evil minions sure as shit did avert or divert additional disaster in The (ahem) Homeland in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and early 2009. If there’d been another 9/11 you’d be here shrieking about it, demanding to know why Rove et al. didn’t take every precaution and connect every dot and subvert every civil right to save the day.
When Al Qaeda or Al Gore brings a big ugly bomb through the Port of Seattle, let ’em detonate the bastard on your front porch. Then you can tell us about exaggerated threats.
Speaking of, the global-warming/climate-change madness is madness. The cap’n’trade “solution” to the “problem” is madness. If the Senate passes it, we get a tiny fraction of one degree of “benefit” at a cost of thousands of dollars loaded regressively on those least able to pay. Such a deal! The kind of deal that only a damn Democrat or Dave Reichart could like.
Hairspray Dave @ 14
You seem to harbor a considerable amount of bitterness because of your status as politically irrelevant. I can understand that clinging to a political ideology that ensures you will never again vote for a winning candidate could be disheartening, but expressing your vile, vapid nonsense in a public forum just makes you look pitiful. Therapy is available for people like you. Seek it out, son.
You remind me of me, son, since I’ve trotted out similar HA tropes against Goldstein, Rabbit, YLB, and maybe you.
As for being on the losing side, check this:
That’s from FOB (Friend of Bill/Barack) Robert B. Reichhhhhhhh, 2001.
The doornails shall rise again.
That’s thousands of dollars of cap/trade tax per payer, thousands of millions of dollars in aggregate.
20 and 21
Ye who be of the same pen–we’ll see, m’lad, we’ll see. The problem with your party is that you have no ideas, you have no bench, historical trends are against you, your numbers are pathetic, the demographics are against you, Ronald Reagan is a maggot-ridden corpse, you have no Ronald Reagan coming to your rescue–how long should I make this list?–you are averse to facts, you cling to notions that were never true (not even in the 1950s), you exalt those who most Americans think are jokes (uh, Palin)–I really can keep this up for a long, long time. Make no mistake, I wish, for the sake of democracy, that the Republican Party represented the noble opposition. It does not, however. All it is now is a few people following Rush who are leading their party into oblivion. Go for it, man.
A couple of points:
First, Goldy is correct in observing that Reichert is up to his old tricks. He voted against the cap and trade bill in the key procedural votes. After he was sure it would pass anyways, he gets to go on record as being for the bill.
He is a total slime ball. Who knows what he truly believes?
All we know is that he will follow the republican party line and then hop off when he is not needed to appear to fit better into his district.
As to the republican party – they have no leaders who are not either tainted or bat-shit crazy rightwingnuts with stupid ideas. They will continue to lose support and elections as they cater to the base elements of their racist, far-right agenda. The republican party today stands for very few actual policies except:
deregulation (completely discredited after the banking crisis)
less taxes (except when they have a republican congress and a republican President)
global warming deniers (the anti-science crowd)
do-nothing, laissez faire economic policy (in the face of a depression).
family values (except for the republican congress)
defending Iraq and claiming that there were wmd’s (delusional politics at it’s best)
whining and criticizing Obama (their main platform)
Reichert took a politically motivated stand, meanwhile McDermott cowered and voted for the supplemental war funding bill. Who knows what McDermott really believes? Other than that you should reelect him, that is.