McHugh, Murphy vote Yes on Climate Change Bill
The U.S. House voted narrowly today to approve historic legislation that would cap the amount of carbon emissions produced in the country and allow various industries to trade pollution credits.
The vote was a slender victory for Democrats, who gathered 219 votes, just 7 more than the minimum needed.
They crossed the finish line with the help of eight crucial Republicans, including North Country Rep. John McHugh.
McHugh is a moderate who has staked out progressive positions on pollution and acid rain issues, often feuding openly with GOP minority leader John Boehner.
(Boehner attempted to filibuster the bill.)
It's also worth noting that McHugh recently accepted President Barack Obama's appointment to serve as Secretary of the Army.
Another crucial vote came from Democratic newcomer Scott Murphy, who represents a Republican-heavy district that stretches from Saranac Lake through the Adirondacks and the Hudson valley to Poughkeepsie.
Here's Murphy's statement, issued on Friday:
“Today, we passed significant legislation to break our nation’s dependence on foreign oil and transition our economy towards energy independence. This bill will make important green investments in the 20th district, making our district and New York State more competitive and attractive in the clean energy marketplace.”
Another New York Democrat who represents a slice of the North Country, Michael Arcuri, voted against the bill. As did newcomer Eric Massa, who according to Politico angered House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for breaking ranks at the last minute:
A third member who has irked the powers-that-be: Rookie upstate New York Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY), who voted "no" despite a photo op with President Obama. Massa has also alienated many in Pelosi's team by introducing a House pay freeze jointly with Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.).
posted by Brian Mann @ 6/26/2009 10:16:00 PM
18 Comments
18 Comments:
These 8 rep. who voted yes on this climate bill should change sides.I would have more respect for them. Don't they know by the time the gov. gets done telling all the companys what they have to do to cut down on green house gasses the prices of all this will fall on the consumers.Jobs will be lost.
What the crap!
I wrote a little something about John McHugh last night:
http://nygoe.wordpress.com/2009/06/26/congressman-john-mchugh-judas-to-become-secretary-of-the-army/
Any one, no matter the party they represent that voted yes cares anything about this country. They care only about themselves and needs to be voted out of office ASAP,we do not need representation from anyone who votes on any bill that they don't even read.What are we thinking to allow this to happen over and over and over while everyday our liberties are being stripped away.These fools in Washington have lost their way. Vote against all incumbents!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Time to clean house
Every Representative who voted in favor of the climate change bill, just signed their career death warrent. We're coming for you at the ballot box. The silent majority is waking up and we're coming for you. Every zellot who votes to keep taking money out of our pocket. We're Coming For YOU!
The Obama administration continues to use climate change fraud as a revenue raising scheme – even as evidence mounts that man-made global warming is “the worst scientific scandal in history.”
WSJ: The Climate Change Climate Change
IBD: Carbongate
related: McHugh Sells Vote for Army Job
read the stories at Adirondack Citizen
Regarding the climate change vote and the fools that voted for it; all that can be said is "Je me souviens"
Shame on the 8 Republicians that voted yes on the
Climate Change bill. Thanks for sending all of us down the river without a life jacket. I hope all of you are voted OUT. I cannot say it loud enough. You don't represent us, you only represent your fellow
blood sucking Dems. I hope all of you have sleepless
nights, but I doubt it because you are all spineless.
A couple of thoughts:
First, this vote matches McHugh's voting record pretty consistently over his tenure in Congress.
The suggestion that he "sold" his vote for his appointment to serve as Army Secretary ignores his long history of conflict with John Boehner and other GOP leaders over environmental issues.
Second, by wide margins the people who voted in a Democratic majority in Congress and a Democratic president see climate change as scientific fact, a problem every bit as serious as terrorism or the economy.
Those who want prefer to believe otherwise have two options: You can continue to complain about Mr. Obama's motives, or you can try to muster enough votes to win elections.
Finally, I'll say this. Republicans are vulnerable on this issue because their arguments that climate change is fiction fly in the face of an amazingly broad scientific consensus.
Those Republicans who accept climate change -- and a growing number of GOP leaders do -- have failed to offer real alternative for solving the problem.
--Brian
Don't I recall many "patriots" calling for an end to sending our oil money to terrorist harboring Islamic countries that don't like us? Energy independence is paramount, and if we can practice earthly stewardship (that has sadly become politicized), amen! Yes stewardship is costly. Maybe this is part of the sacrifice that many of us were expecting our President to call on us to make. But then, again, true stewardship does call us to sacrifice.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WILL REMEMBER MCHUGH, AND MURPHY WHEN THEY ARE UP FOR RE-ELECTION......PAY BACK WILL BE A BITCH!
Anonymous, you need to check your facts. Even the Wall Street Journal has recanted their stance since global warming has leveled off. Our allies in Australia just killed their own climate change bill because they see the truth. Guess this will be a unilateral move that does nothing but kill jobs and raise prices and taxes across the board in the USA.
This was pushed through so fast without reading by the members who voted for it because the White House and the DEM leadership know they have to act fast before too many people realize that Al Gore is not a scientist. By the way, even in his "movie" the rising CO2 levels are almost a match to the deforestation of the plant. But you can't tax a tree and spend the money so noone cares. Trees consume CO2 and give back oxygen.
I will campaign for my reps that voted against this and actively campaign against ANYONE who voted for it. I am just the tip of the iceberg. If you voted for this, pack your bags when reelection time comes!
Anonymous -
The facts here are very clear: Among scientists there is no debate about the broad parameters of climate change; nor do researchers knowledgeable about this issue question whether humans are a prime cause.
Yes, there are outliers and those who dispute pieces of the argument, as is only appropriate and natural. And yes, it's possible that the scientific community writ large is wrong, as many conservatives hope.
But that doesn't change the facts: If the earth were a human body, we would have an expert opinion and hundreds of "second" opinions, all concurring that there is a serious ailment and something needs to be done.
A couple of other points:
I think it will be interesting to see whether this becomes a political issue come election time. 2010 is very near, so we'll get a real test of where the public will rests on this issue.
Also, it's almost certain that John McHugh will never face an election again. His confirmation as Army Secretary seems all but certain, meaning that he will serve in the Obama Administration and someone else will take his House seat.
-Brian
Dear Brian Anonymous,
A "consensus" in science means nothing:
"Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus..." - Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard
There is no evidence to support the notion of man-made climate change, zero. But there is a million years of history that support the view of a cyclical rise and fall in global temperature. The last peak occurred at about year 1000 and the last valley at about 1600. Since then the Earth has been in a warming trend, as is expected based on a million years of history and will continue to warm for about another 300 years. Any prediction that the climate will continue to warm is a slam-dunk because that's what it's supposed to do. But what supreme arrogance it is to say that we are causing it, that we have the power to do anything about it, or that the climate we have today is the only one there should ever be. What gall!
But the Democrats/Liberals/Socialists/Communists (they're all the same) intend to use it to bankroll their schemes and tell us all how to live.
Hang on to your wallets.
Jim
Did anyone take the opportunity to read through the enitre cap and tax bill before the House voted on it?
Compare for yourself.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24292.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0609/Axelrod_waffles_on_Obama_nomiddleclasstaxhike_vow.html?showall
It apppears Murphy is one of many responsible for the last minute, 3 AM changes rammed in that no one had a chance to read and likely bought his vote -
http://www.poststar.com/blogs/?p=27014&cat=259
where he states:
“I had been battling with the authors of the bill about making sure that our paper mills were treated fairly. And we finally reached an agreement with that at the last minute,”
This guy may be a newcomer, but is just as corrupt as the rest. Regardless of your views on the content, the manner in which this bill was railroaded through without proper vetting is irresponsible at best, and should outrage to all who strive for fair treatment of all viewpoints. Murphy's first term needs to be his last.
I think it was actually only 1 vote over the minimum needed to pass it, of 218.
For myself, I don't buy into Global warming but do believe we need to cut back on polution.
Will it cost some? Sure. But it will cost less than the taxes I pay to smoke cigarettes.
Post a Comment
<< Home