Bipartisan history
Never has Congress been so polarized. It is now almost impossible to pass legislation to improve the nation — the parties are more intent on self-aggrandizement and the status of their political party. It has gotten so bad that Sen. Olympia Snowe decided in disgust last month not to run again.
It was not always this way. There was a time when the country came first. Mainers don’t have to look beyond our state for excellent examples of bipartisanship and cordiality. Sens. Edmund Muskie, a Democrat, and Margaret Chase Smith, a Republican, were good friends who forged major legislation that benefited the nation and Maine. Later, Republican Sen. William Cohen and Democratic Sen. George Mitchell worked in unison to sponsor major bills for the common good. The close friends even co-authored a novel. No wonder President Bill Clinton crossed party lines to appoint Cohen his secretary of state.
Out-of-state models of mutual respect and common goals are plentiful. In the 1996 Massachusetts Senate race, Republican Gov. William Weld challenged Democratic incumbent John Kerry. The two moderates agreed to wage a positive campaign based on issues, not personality or party. They even agreed on the financial parameters of their campaigns. The two politicians remained friends after Kerry defeated Weld for the seat.
Also, who can forget President Ronald Reagan’s amicable relationship with House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neill? The two Irishmen from opposing parties were known for their good-natured ribbing of each other and their collaboration on major beneficial legislation.
This country should follow the example of these effective and intelligent politicians.
Ross Paradis
Frenchville
Texting and ticketing
Let’s get real. Only one ticket for text messaging and driving given out between four police departments is a joke.
Last week as I was driving down Union Street I observed three people texting while driving. I phoned the Bangor police and turned one of the drivers in. The problem is that the police can’t stop drivers who they think are texting. They have to break some other law so the police have a reason to give a ticket.
If texting and driving is becoming a major problem then it should be treated as such. A fine of $140 is also a joke. Let’s treat it the same as drunk driving and let the fine reflect as much. Also, the person’s right to drive should be suspended. The trouble is that the people doing the texting know they have nothing to fear from the police because it is not treated as a grievous crime.
It’s time to change the law and the punishment.
John L. Clark
Bangor
Fee and dividend
The price of oil and coal is controversial because we all depend so much on those fuels for almost everything we do. We are not sure how the oil companies come up with the price we are forced to pay (many subsidies and tax breaks confuse the “fair market”).
Renewable energy sources don’t enjoy such large subsidies and tax breaks and aren’t likely to get any under the current economic system — that is, oil and coal companies are not likely to give up these advantages willingly or easily.
Here’s an emerging simple idea that we might all think about, called “Fee and Dividend”:
The government assesses a carbon fee on the oil or coal producer at the point of production, based on carbon content of the fuel, for the privilege of using our nation’s natural resources. The government passes 100 percent of income from this fee to us, citizens and consumers, on a per capita basis (this is the “dividend”).
The producer will pass along the cost of the fee to the consumer by raising the price of the product. The consumer will have more money to pay for the increased price of oil or coal, or could spend it on other forms of noncarbon energy which would not be subject to the carbon fee and therefore relatively less expensive.
The market could then be made more “fair” for renewable energy sources. This is just a thought for chewing on as we all struggle to make ends meet.
Sam Brown
Parkman
So long as “compromise” is a dirty word we will be polarized.
Prepare yourself, the chasm is about to get even wider.
that’s sad
Well that’s what happens when people that stand for nothing produce more minions that stand for even less. What was once a shining city is now a spiritually bankrupt nation about to collapse in immorality. It is sad.
Who stands for nothing…?
you don’t have to believe in god, to be moral. I know a few who post here, that would just as soon lie as look at you.
Case in point; Detroit Mich.
Nagasaki and Hiroshima look better today than Detroit.
http://imgur.com/WROWE
Okay, I’m a native Detroiter, and I keep in touch. My sister-in-law lives in Detroit, my sister lives in Livonia, and I have many other relatives there that I visit and keep in touch with. I know something of the economic hardships of that city, and of the many different factors that have gone into Detroit’s long decline.
Yet cp444’s point is obscure, and does not appear to reference Detroit. Yo reference Detroit, but I discern no point in your posting. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were rebuilt long ago, and yes, they look better than Detroit today.
Did you have a point to make? Maybe you imagine that you said something understandable.
I visited Detroit briefly last year during a 5-hr layover at the airport. A cabdriver took me on a tour of the downtown area and I was very impressed and thought it was lovely. Wanted to visit Hitsville USA but alas it was a Monday so it was closed! Never realized there even was a Detroit River, or that Toronto was just across it. Beautiful esplanade along the river and a pretty spectacular airport I might add.
Yes, downtown Detroit is lovely, although the main shopping district that was once on Woodward Avenue hasn’t ever recovered. My sister-in-law lives near downtown in a very nice neighborhood (my brother is deceased). Much of Detroit is in rough shape, parts of it are nice. The suburbs are doing pretty well. Yes, the Detroit river is the border with Canada, and one goes north from Windsor (not Toronto), Ontario, Canada, to get into the United States. This is the only place where the United States is north of Canada!
I’m sure the taxi driver gave you a well rounded view of ALL Detroit has to offer.
There are places in Detroit that even cabs won’t visit during the daylight hours.
Stop with the EJ Parsons routine and stop posting about things you have no idea about.
I worked in Detroit for Mo Udall in the 1976 Democratic Presidential Primary (He would have been a better nominee than Carter) and had a good time in some fairly rough neighborhoods as well as in the downtown. I got a across the river to Windsor, as well.
Yes, there are some places in Detroit that are not pretty, but any fool who compares it to Hiroshima or Nagasaki after our nuclear bombing needs to read Hersey’s Hiroshima. Equating urban decay from the loss of a manufacturing base with a nuclear attack is a sign that a poster is unhinged from reality.
That’s putting it mildly.
Would “dumber than a dittohead” be more accurate?
I think it’s been established that there isn’t anything dumber than a dittohead. Remember ditto machines? They sure are getting a bad rap these days.
Limbaugh is dumber than a dittohead. Not all of his dumbness rubs off in the replication, just as the ditto copies differ slightly from the original.
Limbaugh is one of the Smartest ever. He built an empire based on talking BS.
Sounds like a place YOU would want to live.
You are still unhinged from reality, I see.
My point was that an atomic bomb hasn’t done as much (long lasting) damage in Japan as the entitlement programs that have been bombarding Detroit for the last forty years.
Which gives us a view on the state of these United States if the practice of buying votes in exchange for an entitlement lifestyle is not ended.
The citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki who survived the bombings would disagree with you; the 250,000 that died within four months of the bombings are voiceless.
NAFTA helped “depopulate” Detroit. You can find most of those former Detroit residents in Texas. Not one of them would trade places with the corpses at Hiroshima or Nagasaki.
Were it “entitlements” that led to Detroit’s downsizing, all of America would be in the same condition as parts of Detroit. Entitlement standards are fairly uniform nationwide.
As AFDC was replaced with TANF in 1996, it is puzzling that you still rant about “entitlements.” Are you calling Social Security, Medicare, military pensions, and government pensions “entitlements?”
If you are 65 or older or retired military, I hope you have burned your Military, Medicare and Social Security cards. It would be a shame to see you be part of the “entitlement lifestyle.”
You are “entitled” to your opinions, but not your own facts.
AFDC
TANF
FOODSTAMPS
SNAP FUNDS
All=entitlement programs designed to entice the illinformed voter to support candidates that promise them something for FREE.
It’s all free.
Just slide your EBT.
Your intelligence is conspicuous by its absence. AFDC no longer exists. TANF has a five year limit, with limited exceptions, and SNAP is what we used to call food stamps.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki and all of Japan have a more generous social safety net than the USA. Thus, you must feel that America would benefit from broadening its safety net.
Years ago I helped administer AFDC and food stamps programs. The recipients typically worked part-time and struggled to raise children. With a higher minimum wage most would have gladly surrendered all benefits.
Bush promised the Republicans that they could continue invading countries without raising taxes to pay for their wars of choice, that they could get tax breaks without corresponding spending cuts, and Medicare Part D without taxes to pay for it. I assume you supported each of these giveaways.
I will now think of you as a Free Lunch Republican.
“Conspicuous by its absence,” as in “The only person on the scene missing.”
Oxymoron is the theme for the right: Republican moderate and fighting for peace are but two examples.
Liberal Intelligence?
Those with post-graduate educations are the most likely to vote Democratic; those who dropped out of college the most likely to vote Republican.
So are you a 1%’er as you claim or an underpaid staffer at HHS? You also, in the past, said you have never accepted a dollar of state money.
I have always told you the truth and never once suggested that I currently worked for HHS. For a single year between college and post-graduate school I worked a day job in a welfare department and waited tables by night. What about the phrase “years ago” in my post confuses you?
I stated that I do not work for or contract with the state, not that I never did.
You seem to have a problem understanding the use of tenses in the English language.
Thanks, I needed that! LOL
OOOOOH ! Scarey.
You don’t know much about Detroit, it seems. Entitlement programs are not what hurt the economy of Detroit. Boston and San Francisco and Chicago have the same programs, and yet they have vibrant downtown shopping and theater districts and don’t have the huge number of vacant lots and abandoned homes that Detroit has.
Detroit’s economic problems have much more to do with the cyclic boom and bust nature of the American auto industry, educational levels of the Detroit work force, and the specific historic nature of racial segregation (both de facto and in some cased de jure) in Detroit and surrounding communities.
It was so much better in the 1950s wasn’t it? Women stayed in the home, blacks were kept segregated, gays were in the closet, Joe McCarthy could rant about “Communists” in between his long bouts of drinking, and every corporation could pollute our air and water to its “heart’s” content (After all, we now know that corporations are people.).
Now I discover from that noble American, Joe Arpaio, that our President was born in Kenya! Egads!!!! I thought he was Hawaiian and that this explained his dark complexion! Our President is African!! All is lost!! Help!!!!
Yes what we need to do as a country is elect the “true” christians into power in local, state the federal governments; executive, legislative and judicial. We need the “true” christians to lead business, financial institutions, media, education etc. to prepare the nation for the “return”. We need to look back to the “shining city” era of US history ….. when men of non-Caucasian descent were not treated equally under the law, when elections were in the hands of male property owners only, when females fulfilled/performed their biblically assigned roles without question of equality under the law, when education was primarily for males who would become property owning voters, when women and children were commodities for the benefit of increasing property and wealth, when abusing one’s wife physically or sexually and the physical abuse of one’s children was a private issue not covered by law ……. OR were you speaking of another time?
Were the Rs to run Santorum and get really whacked, the chasm would begin to narrow. When Mondale and Dukakis got whacked, the Democrats moved rightward.
Mr. Paradis, the core problems giving us a lack of bipartisanship are gerrymandering and primary voting.
Congressional districts, particularly in the South, are designed to create urban districts that are 80-90% Democratic and outlying districts that are 60% Republican. Thus, states like Florida and Virginia, which are classic swing states in Presidential elections, have breakdowns that tilt wildly towards the Republicans. Florida’s delegation of 25 has 19 Republicans; Virginia’s delegation of 11 has 8 Republicans. Winning the primary in any of these gerrymandered districts means one will likely win in November. Each candidate, in the primary, wins by playing to the base.
If every Congressional district was created to mirror the partisan breakdown of the state in the last Presidential election, then the middle might have a chance.
Congrats, you managed to make a comment on bi-partisanship all about partisanship. Quite an accomplishment.
What about the sentence “Each candidate, in the primary, wins by playing to the base,” did you not understand? When one’s district is 80-90% Democratic there is no need to campaign towards the middle. The same is true when a district is 60% Republican.
Yes, and over the past four or even five decades the left has gravitated more and more toward the Democratic Party while the right has gravitated more and more toward the Republican Party, making cooperation between the parties more difficult.
I remember the 1960s quite clearly — there were many moderate and liberal Republicans and many conservative Democrats. It was not always clear which party was more liberal and which party was more conservative. That allowed members of Congress to work across the aisles to build coalitions and alliances, and get work done.
But the Republican Party has moved hard to the right in the past decade, accelerating a trend that had already developed in the Once-Grand Old Party. Compromise has become a dirty word in hard-right Republican circles.
And the Democrats, now clearly the liberal Party, have shifted a bit more toward the center under the leadership of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Liberals and progressives have no place else to go, and so have decided to live with this move toward the middle. The far left virtually disappeared decades ago.
One would think that the Democratic move toward the center would make cooperation and compromise easier, but with the Republicans marching single-file behind Grover Norquist and hate-talk radio, compromise is a bad word and Congress faces gridlock.
Agreed. The parties are now more regionally based. Dixie-crats became Republicans and moderate northern Republicans like Senator Dirksen have been replaced by moderate Democrats like President Obama. It is remarkable to see the Affordable Care Act (which was modeled on the Republican alternative to Bill Clinton’s proposal in 1993) denounced by the right as “socialism.”
I have read articles over the last ten years or so saying that people tend to move to live near other people that think alike. Liberals tend to move into liberal districts and the same for conservatives. In the last few years with house -hoping being on the decline it may not be as true, but prior to that it was.
That said, you can see both Republican and Democratic Congressional districts have pretty funny shapes. A part of the fault lies with Democrats wanting to elect African American Congresspeople and making certain that happens during redistricting. Part with Republicans to maintain their power. Until race and gender and all the other ways that politicians try to split us are taken out of the equation there is not much that will change.
btw when was the last time that an African American Democrat was elected in a predominately Caucasian district?
2008 is one example, and he became President of the United States, the United States being a “predominantly Caucasian district.” Before that he was a U.S. Senator from a predominantly Caucasian district called Illinois.
The discussion was on Congressional districts and gerrymandering, I thought. That was why I asked about African American Democrats being elected from primarily Caucasian districts. Some districts are set up to insure black representation, not only in the South but in places like Chicago as well. (I used to live there, was a Teamster btw) These districts are primarily African American so it is a fair question I thought.
Yes, I’ve also lived in Chicago for four years, about three and a half blocks from where the Obamas now have their home. I was on the poorer side of 51st Street (Hyde Park Blvd.).
Both major parties have engaged in cases of Gerrymandering, and as a practice it goes back to the early days of the republic, as its name (after Elbridge Gerry, 1774-1814) suggests.
My statement above, about Obama being elected in a Caucasian district called the United States, was meant to be humorous, by the way.
:-)
There has been a split within the Democratic Party on re-districting in the South and politics has made strange bedfellows of conservative Republicans and liberal African-American Democrats.
I don’t have enough information to answer your question as to congressional districts, but on a state-wide or national basis, the following examples should suffice: Governor Wilder, Senator Mosely-Brown, Senator Obama, Governor Patrick, President Obama.
See response to penzance.
2008, Barak was elected President of the USA. The predominate race is caucasian.
Governor of Mass. not sure what year but he still is the governor.
I’m sure there are others.
Again the question was one of “gerrymandered” Congressional districts. The other are obviously states and the country by definition cannot be Gerrymandered. Holy cr*p!! No IQ’s in use today!!!
Nah, I thoughgt I’d give them a rest today. Both parties are guilty of gerrymandering to either include or exclude perceived votes. Texas, the Carolinas, we even just this year had a demostration of gerrymandering with the attempt to gerrymander a Republican majority for Pingrees seat.
yeah but….. yeah Yeah…. but….. *face Palm*
Amcon, it’s more and more obvious that you are an operative working for President Obama. You keep creating posts designed to make Republicans look like crazed zealots totally divorced from reality. Give up the con, Amcon.
LOL
Now that was funny. Lets take bets on how long this liberal rag of a paper takes to remove it.
Got to be some amount of damage when you see smoke pouring from their ears.
Where there’s smoke………………..
Why do you read it?
Sam Brown: Oil companies do not set prices. People can’t afford rates today, adding fees will only increase costs. There are no cheaper alternatives that consumers can currently access.
Oil companies don’t set the price on a barrel of crude. After that they seem quite free to put what every price they want on the by-products of that barrel.
Trade that Hummer in for a Prius and you’ll find you have a “cheaper alternative.”
I use as much gas as I can as it will never be cheaper. I love the fact that its getting warmer and warmer here in Maine so will contribute as much as I can to warming. I am sooo looking forward to 70 degree weather in March in Maine
When the number 1 Republican in the Senate says his number 1 priority is to make Obama a one term president, what kind of chance does the house or senate have for compromise. It is not Obama you are misinformed and trying to misinform the readers of your stupid posts. Tell me what bills passed has Obama veteoed? It is Congress not Obama, try to keep up with what is going on in the country.
Get away from Fox they wouldn’t know the truth if it hit them in the head.
The damage has begun.
Bill Clinton was the master of polarization; he excelled at it making it an art form. He and his shrew vilified opponents by attacking their character and not discussing policy
LOL, and the opposition didn’t do everything in their power to have him removed???
Sam Brown- There is nothing wrong with the price of oil, when adjusted for inflation, it is about where it should be. The problem is the wages are stuck in the early 90’s in this country and money keeps getting tighter and tighter because the cost of living continues to climb while the wages have not. The only ones benefiting from this are the top 1% and they control the purse strings as well as the government. America’s largest employer, WalMart, is also America’s largest under employer. They pay their average employee less than half the federal poverty level while the 6 Walton heirs have amassed a $93 billion dollar fortune. In this economy. Your barking up the wrong tree, Sam.
Won’t be long before you 99%ers will be at Walmart looking for deals on camping gear and blue tarps. LMFAO !
Do not forget the extra taxes placed on gasoline.
+ Ross Paradis,
“It is now almost impossible to pass legislation to improve the nation …”
You think passing laws improves our situation? Answer that honestly.
+ Sam Brown,
“We are not sure how the oil companies come up with the price …”
If the price of gas was just between buyer and the seller, then the only price you have to worry about is his or her markup fee.
When you subsidize a product, and at the same time tax it heavily… You’re going to drive the prices up. You realize that we pay for the same gas, up to at least 4 times? It’s taxed, so you pay that at the pump. It’s subsidized, so oil companies get a chunk of the tax you payed. You also pay for the profit margin of the company. Oh and don’t forget, you pay for the markup on the product used to help offset their corporate tax rate and personal income rates.
Less taxes and subsidies would bring the price down.
Don’t forget all the legislation used to stop extraction and production of petroleum products. That drives the price up because of supply and demand!
Oh and don’t forget the pointless ethenol alcohol that we put in there, which ruins our engines, costing us more in the long run. How much petroleum is used to distill the alcohol, and how much does THAT cost us?
Ross Paradis – There have been some great examples of bipartisanship in the past. But, with the progressives taking over the Democratic Party, and the RINO establishment politicians working more for themselves than for the country, the real patriotic American politicians have had to band together in opposition. The divide has widened, and it’s damaged this nation nearly to the point of no return. Obama, unfortunately, is the Partisan-in-Chief, and he has no intention at all of compromising. Senator Reid has blocked 30 jobs bills sent up by the House, and the President is actually backing Reid’s obstructionist actions. The President personally calls members of Congress to tell them how to vote on key issues. And in ever speech or press conference he gives, he takes swipes at the Republicans. He’s a disgrace to the office.
Unfortunately, he’s got a lot of people in his back pocket with all the unearned handouts and freebies. And he’s got a lot of people completely fooled into believing that he actually cares about them and about the country. He only has eyes for himself and his Progressive, anti-American agenda.
If we don’t vote him out in November, the damage he and his fellow Progressives will do to this country may be fatal.
Enough with your offensive and disgusting comments. I’m a liberal and I’m also a real patriotic American.
EJ is so partisan, so far to the right, and so blind, that he simply can’t see the patriotism of those he disagrees with.
American Patriotism is the willingness to fight and, if necessary, die to keep the freedoms and liberties of the country, and to protect the American people from tyranny. So many simply don’t understand the true meaning of being a patriot.
Nope, Waking up every morning is being a patriot. We have all signed that contract called the constitution. The great thing about it is, it doesn’t care what you do, who you are, whether you have fought or not. All it matters is that you are an American Citizen. You clearly have a small view of what makers America great, what makes her citizens patriots.
Being a citizen does not make one a patriot. Not by a long shot.
“My country right or wrong — when right to keep it right, when wrong to make it right again.” — Carl Schurtz, a Union General in the Civil War.
Sam Brown – You’re touting the left wing lies about energy in this country. First of all, oil subsidies are only 13% of the total energy subsidies, and the only subsidies that actually produce more revenue to the government than is spent. Most others, wind, solar, etc., are nothing more than taxpayer money pits. In other words, the subsidies we pay to big oil come back to us and then some.
This country runs on oil products. Our military runs on oil products. There is an abundance of oil reserves already verified on American property, but Obama and his anti-oil crowd won’t let us drill for it. They keep spreading the lie that we only have 2% of the world’s oil. They keep spreading the lie that drilling won’t bring down the price of gasoline. They keep spreading the lie that ethanol is better for the environment. They keep spreading the lie that it’s because of Obama that oil production is now at an 8 year high. And so many keep falling for the lies.
You want to bring the price of oil down? Re-open the off shore sites on the East and West coasts that Obama put off limits when he took office. Release the drilling permits that have been on hold since the BP oil spill. Keep the 2 billion Obama pledged to Brazil for their oil program and invest it in American oil production. Cut the gasoline blends down to 3 or 4, not over 20. Approve the Keystone Pipeline. And put some pride back in the American oil process.
I can guarantee that if we get serious about American oil production, that as soon as the first drill bit hits the ground, and the world realizes we’re serious, oil prices will fall and several oil producing countries, particularly the ones that hate us, will get on their knees and beg us to stop.
But, as long as we have an anti-oil President and obstructionists Democrats and RINOs in Congress, the only thing that will happen is more of the same. We can’t handle any more of the same.
It’s odd that under this “anti-oil” president domestic exploration and drilling for both oil and gas are way up. Shows how anti-oil Obama really is.
Most of the leases and new drilling, in fact over 90%, were okayed under President Bush. The approval of new applications on private land is way down and there have been ZERO approvals on public land since Obama took office.
And the decline of the number of applications for these leases or not meeting safety standards requirements addressed in the applications have absolutely nothing to do with anything either……
I did not know that. Have the standards changed to make it nearly impossible to file?
But, if it’s a good thing from the Bush administration, the Dems will take credit for it. You know the rules.
And you will blame the Dems for things they didn’t do. You know the rules.
You have to abide by the rules of the party in power. At least that’s what I’ve been told over and over and over.
I’ve never heard that one.
In our system, everyone gets to express an opinion, even if it’s nutty. The party in power has nothing to do with it.
Not on the BDN. Just ask amconservative.
The BDN seems to post any nutty thing you write.
But, on the other hand, they could decide to be “unfair, unbalanced, and unhinged” like Fox News I suppose.
We all get the right to express our own opinion — or, if we have the capital, start our own newspaper or TV network.
There are now twice as many drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico than when Obama took office in 2009 (Forbes web site on 3/14/12). If Obama was actually anti-oil, why hasn’t he stopped this doubling of oil drilling in the Gulf?
Imports of foreign oil are now only 45% of our needs, but were 57% in 2008 — a marked improvement. We imported 65% of our oil in 2005. We are moving toward energy independence.
Yes, President Bush got the ball rolling, and I’m willing to say some nice things about Bush. Good for him. But Obama certainly hasn’t stopped that ball from rolling. EJ Parsons, above, said that Obama “won’t let us drill” — if that is true, how is it that drilling is now way up?
Higher gas mileage mandates for vehicles also help us move toward energy independence, and Pres. Obama has set standards for better vehicle mileage.
Gas prices cannot be blamed on our failure to drill, because domestic drilling is way up. Tensions with Iran and market speculators are most likely the causes of higher gasoline prices. The weaker dollar helps our exports, but also means we are spending more on oil imports, and that also tends to drive up gas prices.
We’ve made leases on public land available to the oil companies, but the oil companies have left almost half unexplored and undeveloped, according to the Forbes article.
Will Obama’s oil policies please everyone? Not likely. But to say he is anti-oil is just silly.
I do not know all here is to know about licensing and so on. I do know they take years from approval to drills in the ground. More so in deep water which has special requirements. Bush was an oil President… It was his business and where his political base was. He approved a lot. Business may set on them for years waiting for the right time. Again new applications are way down with only a few being approved by Obama. …. and none have been approved by the Obama administration on public lands.
I agree that Bush was an oil president, as you say. I applaud him for encouraging drilling, and for about a half-dozen other thing he did. I’m willing to give credit where credit is due. But EJParson said Obama won’t let us drill, which hardly seems true, since drilling under Obama has risen so significantly, even if the process was started by Bush.
Ok… But If I know anything about lease agreements and things like legal approvals it’s this. You can’t change them once they are signed except under very specific circumstances. The vast majority of what you see was signed on President Bush’s watch. President Obama could do little for good or ill to those signed agreements.
It is already in the pipeline a decline forecast on new drilling sites. I normally don’t pay alot of attention to this stuff but their was a discussion on CNBC about this a couple weeks ago when they were talking about all this extra oil flowing to the market yet prices were continuing to rise. The blame was put on psychology of the market because of the declining number of approvals.
Actually, the peak in American drilling was last year. All indications for this year is that it is on the decline. In fact, they are talking about having to shut down and/or remove sections of the Alaskan Oil Pipeline due to Obama enforced restrictions on drilling in Northern Alaska.
Obama is riding the wave set in motion by both Clinton and Bush.
Actually no it wasn’t. Ever hear of Hubberts peak? No? Oil production in the USA peaked in the 70’s.
Sorry, I was talking about the peak in the last 8 years. You know, the only period that Obama is shouting about. I know that the peak was in the 70s. Tell that to Obama.
From 200o to 2008 the price of oil went from about $40/barrel to $140/barrel. The only reason it dropped at the end of the Bush presidency is the economic collapse. The current rise is just bringing the price back to its precrash levels.
There are alot of things that effect the price. A better economy is one.
I agree entirely. I don’t believe local drilling has nearly the same impact…
Facts: Obama stopped all offshore drilling of the East and West coasts when he came into office. Obama backed the Dems refusal to open drilling in the ANWAR. 15 floating drilling rigs have either moved out of the Gulf or are drilling for other countries since the BP oil spill (and many of the new rigs in the Gulf are also drilling for other countries). Obama refused the Keystone Pipeline project. Obama, while running for President, touted the necessity for 4 dollar a gallon gas.
Obama is anti-oil. The facts are there for anyone that wants to know the truth.
“The facts are there for anyone that wants to know the truth.”
That doesn’t include you then.
My favorite slogan for EJ Parsons – EJ Parsons and facts. Never the two shall meet.
What in what I said isn’t a fact?
Guess how much impact Obama has on gas prices/ oil prices? ZERO!!
That’s the same number that comes up when asked what Obama is doing to lower gas prices. Imagine that.
By the way, you need to look at the whole picture. Obama has a lot to do with the price of gas, oil production in the US, and the loss of thousands of oil jobs.
oil production in the USA has little effect, as noted that the USA is producing more oil than it ever has. Demand is the leading cause for oil prices. The USA #1 export is oil, so producing more isn’t going to much good. Opening up new places to drill will not have much good either. Not as long as OPEC controls as much as they do. What can he do? only thing that he can do is temporary. The only permante fix is to get us off oil. Gas prices are a cause by the market, anything he does will be messing with the Free market, which Republicans are all so strongly against.
The president, no matter which party, has very little ability to have any impact on gasoline prices. The Republicans have been saying, “If only we drill more, gas prices will go down.’ So we are drilling more, and gas prices are going up. Oil prices are set on the world market. Demand is up in India and China, there is tension in the Persian Gulf, there is specuation on Wall Street, the dollar is weaker (good for exports but bad for olil prices), and there isn’t any president of any party that has much control over most of the factors that set world oil prices.
1. the US under Obama has become a net EXPORTER of gasoline.2. gasoline was higher in the summer of 2008 under Bush than it is today 3. gasoline was under $2 a gallon when Obama took office only because of the global recession Bush left us. 4. domestically produced oil and gas were deregulated and allowed to be sold at world market prices set by OPEC under Regan, who also repealed the Windfall Profits Tax 5. the current price increase is because of the fear over the situation in Iran and speculation based on that fear. Fear that is being stoked by the three leading Republican presidential candidates.
Being accused of lying by EJParsons is like being accused of financial fraud by Bernie Madoff or infidelity by Newt Gingrich.
“Never has Congress been so polarized” Reallly? Never? Not true. Congress was once so polarized that a large portion of its members left the chambers to form their own government down in Mississippi. We fought a Civil War to fix that inability of Congress to “get along” on the issues of the day.
Our country was founded with the intention to allow adversarial debate on issues. You may not think it is pretty. You may wish that the laws you want passed would just get done already. But for every one of you, there is perhaps another person who does not support that law and does not want to see it passed. How do we resolve these contrary notions? We debate, we argue–sometimes heatedly, but not usually–we use the press to push our agenda and gather support. And eventually something gets done.
True, one should never say never! Of course it was South Carolina that fired the first shot and seceded first, but Mississippi was close behind.
And even before the Civil War a Southern member of the House of Representatives walked into the Senate chamber and beat Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts senseless with his cane, while another Southerner kept the other Senators at bay with his pistol. Because of his injuries, Sen. Sumner did not return to the Senate for years. That’s what I call polarization.
Still, things are worse now in Congress than they have been in a century.
The fault lines have been regional and, sadly, racial. The filibuster was rarely used in the pre-Civil War Senate and did not become a weapon until Dixiecrats sought to block Civil Rights legislation. It has now become endemic with our first African-American President. Senator Collins and Snowe, who complained about the selective filibustering of some of Bush’s court nominees have now joined almost every filibuster against legislation proposed by President Obama and even filibustered his nominee for the CFPB, Richard Cordray, not because they debated his qualifications, but because they wished to amend Dodd-Frank.
The Republicans have threatened filibusters because 1) they strongly oppose the legislation in question and/or 2) the extremist Democrats have refused to negotiate.
I am curious: Has the filibuster actually been used recently, or has it just been threatened? Because I would call their bluff if Republicans threatened a filibuster. Make them hold the floor non-stop for days. It might deter the constant threats if parties actually had to follow through.
Google “filibuster by year” and you will see how the numbers have spiked dramatically since the Democrats regained control of the Senate in January, 2007, and even more dramatically when President Obama began his term.
Democrats strongly opposed the 2003 tax cuts that helped put us in the current deficit hole, but never filibustered that legislation, which passed with less than 60 votes (51-49, followed by 51-50 on the conference report, with VP Cheney breaking the tie). They strongly opposed the Medicare Part D program which was unfunded by any tax and also passed with fewer than 60 votes (54-44).
Technically, many of the filibusters are on procedural motions, usually a motion to consider, which used to be routinely approved by unanimous consent. Once any Senator opposes that motion a vote on cloture follows: without 60 votes the Senate cannot even discuss the bill.
Who are the “extremist Democrats” who refuse to negotiate? Once a motion to consider is passed, full debate on the bill can proceed. Amendments can be offered. There will always be Democrats who come from conservative states who can be convinced to withhold their votes until the final product is satisfactory. That is how Congress used to work until Mitch McConnell, shortly after President Obama’s inauguration, stated that the number one goal of the GOP was President Obama’s defeat.
Yes, Senator Reid could insist that the Senator opposing a motion to consider be allowed to talk ad infinitum, but I doubt that would move a unanimous GOP to waver at all. I’d like to see him try, but you are blaming the victim for intentional delay that even moderate Republicans like Senators Snowe and Collins now endorse. Consider how each of our Senators voted on the motion to consider the Cordray nomination to the CFPB. Now a filibuster is being used not just to stop legislation from being enacted but to force already enacted law to be amended!
The Constitution provides for super-majority votes for very few matters. The intent was that a simple majority could prevail. Two-thirds is required for treaty ratification, Constitutional amendment, veto override, and expulsion of a Senator.
The filibuster rule is nowhere in the Constitution (other than its provision that each chamber may determine its own rules of procedure). By setting the threshold at 60 votes for the Senate to do anything, the Republicans hope that it will do nothing.
There are extremists at work here, but none of them are Democrats.
Thanks for the filibuster refresher. I appreciate the time you took to post this.
Here’s what I picture: a junior Senator from Mississippi droning on about the effect of kudzu on native plant life on the daily news for a day or two. Meanwhile, the majority party can take the case to the public about the colossal waste of time this is. The filibustering party suffers the public’s severe displeasure and decides to use this option only in dire circumstances.Doesn’t it say something about the agenda of the Democrats today that even moderates like Snowe and Collins are willing to hold the Republican party line? The American people are saying they don’t like the direction the country is going. The Democrats are arrogantly thinking the people just don’t know what is in their best interests. The extremists: Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi to name two in Congress right now.
Snowe and Collins reluctantly joined because they didn’t wish to be tea-partied in Republican primaries. The tea partiers in this state went wild when Snowe and Collins voted for the American Recovery Act in early 2009. If you looked at Harry Reid’s voting record you would laugh at yourself for calling him “extreme.” He is anti-abortion and pro-gun. Nancy Pelosi is a mainstream liberal.
It is sad that you can only think with labels. It is a sign that you are running out of ideas.
The likely result of this November’s vote is the re-election of the President, return of a Democratic Senate and a significant loss of Republican seats in the House (although not enough to cost the Rs their majority). I’d say that reflects a rejection of one party by the American people, but it is not the Democratic party. Republicans will keep a slim majority in the House only because so many congressional districts are gerrymandered with the goal of re-electing Republicans.
Interesting point on ethanol: I was working an assignment a few weeks ago when I came across a gas station that had ethanol-free unleaded. So, I filled the tank. Within 10 miles, my Grand Cherokee was running like it was new again. It was absolutely amazing. I knew that ethanol was hard on engines, but didn’t realize just how much pep and power it drags out of an engine. Now when I’m on the road, I use my GasBuddy app and look for stations that have ethanol-free gasoline. It’s more expensive, but well worth it.
John Clark – I agree the penaly for texting while driving should be at least equal to OUI as the potential effect impact on others is the same.
obama has tried , the people have lied
Sam Brown: renewable and “carbon based” are not mutually exclusive. Biofuels (like them or hate them) ARE renewable, but are clearly carbon based.
Let’s not confuse the misplaced obsession with carbon emissions with a perhaps more pressing issue of energy source diversification.
Good letter Ross, but President Clinton compromized with Newt in 1996 to kick families off AFDC. Now USA TODAY says there were 1.2 million homeless children in the US in 2007 and 1.6 million in 2010.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-12-12/homeless-children-increase/51851146/
Better enjoy that force fed fattened goose pate de fois gras while you can Repubs.