West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
(Reposted in case you missed it the first time. - promoted by Clem Guttata)
By Clem Guttata
Coal CEOs get political representation, what about the rest of us?
Logan County Commission President Art Kirkendoll requested a meeting and he got it. Michael Browning reported (emphasis mine):
Kirkendoll has asked Gov. Joe Manchin for a meeting with him, commission presidents from Lincoln, Boone, Mingo and Kanawha counties, the EPA, the Division of Environmental Protection, Congressman Nick Rahall, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, representatives from U.S. senators Robert C. Byrd and Jay Rockefeller's offices and officials from the coal industry.
Today at 3 p.m., the group will meet privately in the governor's office to discuss coal's future and the economic impact it has on the state and nation.
"This meeting was way overdue to have all the major coal producers' officials together with the EPA and the DEP, the congressional people and the commission presidents from the five major coal-producing counties that spend the money and try to create activities on coal tax," Kirkendoll said. "Everybody that has a stake in what we do will be there. Instead of each of us writing letters, I wanted to get us all together - the people who are investing their money, who are spending the money, the people who are making laws and making the rules - so that we can ask how do we a qualify permits that are solid and work. I sent the governor a letter and he thought it was a great idea so he put the meeting together."
Kirkendoll doesn't think anyone downstream has a stake in coal mining. He doesn't think it matters that we drink the same water, breath the same air, or--point of fact--actually pay for the electricity that makes that coal valuable.
...the list of expected attendees includes Massey Energy President Don Blankenship, CONSOL Energy CEO Brett Harvey and International Coal Group President Ben Hatfield. Two members of Congress will be there, as will county commissioners from the state's major coal producing counties, and top officials from a dozen or more other coal companies. It's a big deal to get all those folks in the same room, and it seems like the public ought to know what is said.
With enough twists to fill a pretzel factor, Gov. Manchin and his communications director, Matt Turner, said there was no need to invite potential critics of coal mining practices because:
"the meeting is not about environmental regulations." (AP - via)
"This is not about the environment. This is about the economic plight the (coalfield local government officials) are being put in." (source)
The meeting happened this afternoon outside the Governor's Mansion in a party tent literally bought and paid for by coal industry donors, (I kid you not... you couldn't make this stuff up) and was followed by a press conference.
Nov. 10, 2009 - CHARLESTON, W.Va. - Gov. Joe Manchin, joined by West Virginia elected officials: U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, Congressman Nick Joe Rahall, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, House Speaker Rick Thompson and various other state leaders, county commissioners, representatives from the coal industry and labor met to discuss the future of coal in West Virginia during a press conference. Photos by: Steven W. Rotsch
West Virginia political leaders promised Tuesday to speak "with one voice" to clarify the Obama administration's proposals to more strictly regulate mountaintop removal coal mining.
Gov. Joe Manchin, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, and Reps. Nick J. Rahall and Shelley Moore Capito said they would join forces to seek a high-level White House meeting to raise coal industry concerns about tougher permit reviews instituted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
"It's about the economy of West Virginia," Manchin said at a news conference after a two-hour, closed-door meeting with industry leaders. "We're just trying to find that balance right now."
I'd like someone to ask Gov. Manchin what it is that he's trying to "balance"? As far as I can tell, "balance" is his code word for stopping any tighter environmental regulation enforcement.
Coal company CEOs have been guaranteed a voice in Washington. The Gov. of West Virginia, Sen. Rockefeller, Rep. Rahall and Rep. Capito stood at a podium this afternoon and promised to speak "with one voice" in Washington, DC on their behalf.
The citizens of West Virginia did not elect these officials to represent coal company executives, they serve to represent us all.
What is good for Don Blankenship is not what is good for all of West Virginia. What is good for CONSOL Energy CEO Brett Harvey is not what is good for all of West Virginia (just ask the residents of the Dunkard Creek watershed). What is good for International Coal Group President Ben Hatfield is not what is good for all of West Virginia.
We need political leaders who will lead for all West Virginians, not political followers catering to the needs of coal company CEOs. We need political leaders who will ask not what they can do for coal, but what they can do for West Virginia. We need political leaders who can honor both our heritage and our future.
Campaign cash galore. Joe Manchin III, the current frontrunner and expected nominee for the Democratic Party on the Senate Special Election, is raking in some serious campaign cash prior to the election.
Politico recently reported on the hard numbers in regards to campaign donations for Manchin, and the leading GOP candidate John Raese.
West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin (D) raked in an impressive $418,000 for his Senate bid so far, although his chief Republican opponent already has a significant bankroll.
The popular governor is the front-runner in the Aug. 28 primary and the Nov. 2 special election for the late Robert Byrd's Senate seat. Public polls show him leading mining company owner John Raese by double digits.
Reports indicate that Raese has put roughly $320,000 of his own money into his campaign. An outrageously high amount, but still not enough to match Manchin's campaign contributions.
Manchin has been significantly helped out by Jay Rockefeller, who Politico claims helped raise nearly $200,000 for Manchin over the course of this campaign that opened only just a few weeks ago.
Manchin seems to already be thinking past the primary to the actual Special Election, his sights are set on that prized Senate seat vacated by the late, great Robert C. Byrd earlier in the summer.
Manchin and Raese, as of right now, seem to be the ones who will be nominated for their respected parties going into the general election. Manchin already holds a significant lead on Raese, but I expect that... given Raese's clear dedication to his campaign.... he will be pulling out all of the stops necessary to try to gain on Manchin's lead. The WVGOP wants to have a (R) in the Senate for West Virginia desperately, and I doubt they'll be afraid to sling a little mud along the way.
On June 10th, we all celebrated the defeat of the Murkowski resolution, which would have gutted the EPA's ability to regulate carbon dioxide pollution. Why we needed to defeat Murkowski was explained well by NRDC Action Fund Executive Director, Peter Lehner, who wrote the following prior to the vote:
EPA's proactive lead in greenhouse gas regulation is a critical aspect of the effort to reduce our rampant, destabilizing, and destructive dependence on foreign and offshore oil. While the endangerment finding does not, in itself, prescribe regulations, it provides the legal basis for critical standards: EPA's proposed CAFE efficiency standard for light-duty vehicles is projected to save over 455 million barrels per year, and an anticipated standard for heavy-duty vehicles will save billions more. Stripping EPA of its authority to implement these protections would increase our nation's dependence on oil and send hundreds of billions of dollars overseas. We cannot afford this big step backward, especially as we watch more oil gush into the Gulf each day.
In the end, the Senate didn't take that "big step backward" on June 10th, as the Murkowski resolution failed by a 47-53 vote. Many of us probably figured that was the end of this issue, and that the Senate would now move on to passing comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation. Unfortunately, as is often the case in Washington, DC, it isn't that simple (let alone logical).
Today, clean air and public health are once again under an assault that constitutes, essentially, "Murkowski Part II." The Wall Street Journal reported on June 22:
As U.S. Senate lawmakers attempt to determine the fate of energy legislation, an influential Democrat is boosting efforts to suspend a controversial greenhouse-gas rule passed earlier this year by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
After introducing a bill to impose a two-year halt on the new EPA rule, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a Democrat from coal-rich West Virginia, is now working to round up supporters for his legislation.
It should go without saying that this is completely unacceptable. As we all know, the public was outraged at Senator Murkowski's Big Oil Bailout bill. They understood that this moved the country backward, not forward, and that it was exactly the wrong way to go given the energy and environmental challenges we face. Through all our efforts, our phone calls and emails (and blog posts and tweets, etc.), we helped to kill Murkowski Part I. Now, unfortunately, Sen. Jay Rockefeller is pushing Murkowski Part II, yet there's far less attention being paid to this effort than to the Murkowski's EPA Castration Resolution Part I. People have a lot of other things on their minds, and they thought this fight was over back in June. But, once they find out that this effort is baaaaack, like a monster in a cheesy horror movie, they are not going to respond positively.
Of course, why would the public - which overwhelmingly supports taking action to promote clean energy and deal with climate change - ever respond positively to a proposal aimed at throwing away one of our key tools to cut pollution and protect public health? And why would they respond positively now of all times, as oil continues to spew into the Gulf of Mexico, as record heat waves scorch the United States, and as climate science is strengthened every day that goes by? Last but not least, why would they support an effort to protect the corporate polluters and not all of us who are being hurt by that pollution?
The bottom line is simple: instead of wasting its time on legislation that will only move the country backwards - towards dirty energy forever - the Senate should be busy passing a bill that moves the country forward towards a bright future of green energy, clean tech jobs, energy security and climate protection. Once our Senators hear that message loud and clear from all of us, Rockefeller's Murkowski Part II will be rejected by the Senate, just as Murkowski Part I was before it.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROBERT C. BYRD (D-W.Va.)
IN OPPOSITION TO "MURKOWSKI DISAPPROVAL RESOLUTION"
"I believe that the measure that we are being asked to vote upon today is extreme. The Murkowski Resolution before us today is being presented to the Senate in a most unusual fashion. A "Disapproval Resolution" limits this great institution's ability to conduct an open and thorough debate. This measure prohibits Senators from offering amendments. For those keeping score at home, in this political climate, it is usually the members of the minority party who are blasting the majority party for not allowing amendments on any and every measure that is brought to the Senate floor for debate. Yet, the Resolution offered by Senator Murkowski, a member of the minority party, with co-sponsors who are mostly members of the minority party, suppresses debate on this very important topic."
"Now, I would be the first one to argue in this chamber that it is the members of the legislative branch who should be setting policy concerning the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. We should be doing that. If we are serious about addressing this issue, all of us in this body should, in a bipartisan manner, debate and move forward as soon as possible on a comprehensive energy policy, including a discussion of climate change issues."
"The Senate owes it to the American people to do something other than hold a political vote on the Murkowski "Disapproval Resolution," which has zero prospects for enactment. Even if it did pass the Senate, the House Leadership has indicated that it would not bring it to the floor for a vote, and the President has issued a veto threat. Even if it did pass, it would not alleviate our well-founded uncertainty about the future."
"Many leaders in Congress and around the Nation have been hard at work for the past several years in designing federal energy legislation that will ensure a better future for America's coal miners and other workers, while also making long-overdue investments in new, high-growth American industries."
"The Congress should be debating a new energy policy that makes the best possible use of our abundant coal reserves while transitioning America into a position less dependent on foreign oil, less beholden to the special interests of giant multi-national corporations, and more responsive and proactive in meeting Americans' desire for cleaner and more abundant sources of energy. I understand that the Senate Democratic Leadership is willing to move forward on an energy bill that includes a clear-cut pre-emption for action by the Environmental Protection Agency."
"I have been working with many of my colleagues to help shape a bill that will be good for the future of coal and the coal industry in my home State of West Virginia. Having a seat at the table and being open to discussions on these matters has enabled me to add provisions relating to clean coal technologies, job creation, and transitions to new jobs to proposed legislation. And I have secured commitments to provide billions of dollars for constructing the next generation of cleaner coal-fired power plants, and am currently negotiating for billions more to support businesses and job creation in the West Virginia region, as well as to improve highways, broadband access, and other critical infrastructure and economic development services for the people, entrepreneurs, and businesses that will make West Virginia stronger in the future. These provisions are beneficial for my home state of West Virginia and for the people of the entire Appalachia region."
"The Murkowski "Disapproval Resolution" overturns the "endangerment finding." This in essence is like voting to assert that there is no climate change or global warming going on, and to dismiss scientific facts that already exist. As I have pointed out before, to deny the mounting science of climate change is to stick our heads in the sand and say "deal me out." West Virginia needs to stay at the table, as should all Senators who have concerns about our energy policy."
"Finally, mark my words, the regulation of greenhouse gasses is approaching, whether done by Congress or by regulation, despite naysayers who rail about the non-existence of climate change."
"This Resolution, I fear, would have a sweeping impact. It could preclude action to reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil. It could delay critical investments in clean coal technologies. That's not a national energy strategy I can or want to support. My vote today against the Murkowski Resolution is a vote for coal's future and my intention to continue to have a seat at the table and a voice for West Virginia in how we legislate our energy future."
For weeks, environmental groups have been pressuring to defeat Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski's resolution to weaken the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. Our junior senator was at the heart of such pressure, as he was a key swing vote in deciding whether Murkowski's resolution would gain favor in the senate.
Rockefeller introduced a separate bill that would have more narrowly limited EPA's authority by imposing a two-year time-out on EPA climate rules for stationary sources, but he has said he had trouble advancing the measure.
In other words, the Rockefeller bill would give a two-year grace period for any EPA environmental regulations to take effect. The White House, thankfully, has promised to veto the Murkowski disapproval resolution, should it somehow pass in the senate.
At stake here is Senator Rockefeller's unfortunate stance that the coal industry and other carbon-producing companies should not be regulated at the federal level (e.g., very little or no regulation) and his wrongheaded support of an anti-environmental agenda. Rockefeller needs to rescind his support for the Murkowski amendment and withdraw his alternate, weak bill that stifles the EPA's ability to protect communities from industry-created environmental destruction. Rockefeller's antiquated stance here is anything but progressive, unfortunately.
The Charleston Daily Mail reports on Blankenship's appearance on WOWK's wingnutty "Decision Makers" program:
CHARLESTON, W.Va.--Massey CEO Don Blankenship said in a weekend TV interview that "evil people" have ascended the ranks of power in the United States and implied Sen. Jay Rockefeller was among them.
In an appearance on the WBOY and WOWK show "Decision Makers," Blankenship was asked about the impact of Rockefeller's comments that Massey was a "rogue" operator.
Rockefeller, D-W.Va., was being critical of Massey and Blankenship following the explosion last month at the company's Upper Big Branch mine that killed 29.
In the past, Rockefeller has gone out of his way to regurgitate the War on CoalTM hysteria and attack the Obama administration's environmental protection efforts.
It appears it did little good for him.
A mild defense of the EPA got Rep. Rahall's face printed on Massey-distributed "Nick Joe is anti-coal" signs. Accurately stating the case on mine safety has made Rockefeller fall out of favor with Blankenship.
It's time for Rockefeller and other officials to realize Blankenship will never be satisified with anything less than 100% obedience. The constant attempts to pander to him are just embarrassing.
That Republicans are now attempting to block all Congressional hearings could be their unified push back at the looming possibility of the public option being introduced.
The polls are certainly showing that since the bill's signing, more and more Americans either like the bill as passed, or else wish the reform did more.
In all of the joy and confusion leading up to the passage of the Senate version, most Dem Obamacare watchers probably thought that Congress stripped the public option out because it somehow lowered the bill's overall chances of passing. Actually, it now appears that all they really need to do is simply put it to an up-or-down vote in the senate to get it passed.
Since 45 senators have already publicly declared support of its passage, which of the remaining Dems would hold out? And even if the option did fail, it certainly wouldn't kill the chances of bill's passage altogether, would it?
BECAUSE THE BILL HAS ALREADY PASSED, HASN'T IT?
The more times HCR bounces back to the House from the Senate during reconciliation, the more people will learn what's actually in the bill. So naturally the more they'll begin to realize they like what's in it.
Except for that nasty lack of cost containment. Thanks to the right-leaning Senate Finance committee, it has the same insurance giveaway loophole as Massachussetts' universal HCR system.
Its just too bad that the media and many progressive websites have been so silent about its virtues. Particularly regarding the CBO score that a strong public option would reduce the deficit at least 500 million bucks, and that other prestigious institutions have valued the measure worth as much as a cool trillion in deficit reduction.
It is notable that the senator who sponsored the strong public option in finance committee markup flatly refused to sign any statement that he'd vote for the measure in the reconciliation process, claiming that to do so would be "too partisan", and has cautioned to "never let the perfect be the enemy of the good". Rockefeller also inexplicably failed to mention that a strong public option would reduce the deficit to the finance markup committee.
On June 25th, 2009, Health Care for America Now put on a huge rally in Washington, DC, Health Care '09-Health Care Can't Wait. Over 10,000 people from all across America attended to show support for the public health insurance plan known as the Public Option. Sorry folks, Oprah was a no show.
Over 200 people from West Virginia attended, including folks from the Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO, WV Citizen Action Group,WV National Association of Social Workers, WV Nurses Association, religious organizations, social activists, and even Del. Dale Martin joined in on the fun.
Actress Edie Falco of "The Sopranos" and "Nurse Jackie" fame and former Vermont governor Dr. Howard Dean addressed the crowd. People lacking health care or being victimized by the health insurance industry spoke as well, giving people a glimpse into their real life health care nightmares.
The whole point of the rally was to raise public sentiment towards the Public Option in health care reform through the media. However, on that day, two horrific things happened: the King of Pop and one of Charlie's Angels died. Needless to write, the health care rally didn't get as much attention as the two pop icons' deaths did. Not that we're mad or anything.
After the rally, folks met with their Congressional reps. West Virginians met with reps from Rahall and Mollohan's offices (both were busy), plus were given an audience with Sen. Rockefeller.
The Public Option was pushed big time by unions and organizations all across the state. Rallies and town halls (with some booing from our FOX News loving Tea Party friends)were held with great success, despite what negative stories some media outlets ran. WV-CAG, along with its State HCAN coalition partners, petitioned for the Public Option as well, collecting thousands of signatures.
Right now America has the chance to pass serious reforms in health care. The Public Option might be dead at the moment, but it may very well pop back up after this legislation passes, or even better, Single Payer (Medicare for All) might become the new IT-word in health care reform. Who knows?
It is important West Virginians contact their House reps ASAP and tell them to support the current health care legislation before them.
Sen. Rockefeller Addresses West Virginia Constituents
I just heard today that a member of my extended family had another application for health insurance denied because of a pre-existing condition. This pre-existing condition is something she's had since birth--in fact, the best available scientific evidence suggests she inherited it from a parent, who also has this rare condition.
The denial letter from the insurance company helpfully suggested looking for a state program for coverage. In her case, she's a young adult who is potentially eligible for a state program but only if she goes for at least half a year un-covered by any insurance whatsoever. Meanwhile, she's at risk of major expenses if anything catastrophic happens.
Here's a young adult going to school part time who is falling between the cracks of any available health insurance plan. She's had health insurance her entire life and now that her COBRA coverage has run out she's joining the ranks of the uninsured.
For the conservatives and libertarians reading this who say "the market is the answer"--what we have here is a total market failure--no one will sell her insurance at any price. My relative's story is a hardly exceptional. There are people dying every day for lack of health care coverage.
How can it be that the wealthiest society that has ever existed on this planet is failing so badly to provide for the basic needs of its citizens?
Health care insurance reform can't happen quickly enough.
Keep at it, Sens. Byrd and Rockefeller, Reps. Mollohan and Rahall. We're counting on you to get health care reform passed this month.
The Senate approved $140 billion in extended tax breaks and unemployment benefits on Wednesday in a largely partisan vote.
The bill was approved on a 62-36 vote, with six Republicans joining most Democrats in backing it.
Senate Democrats are calling the measure a jobs bill, though it includes tax breaks extended by Congress on a near-annual basis as well as a fix to Medicare payments for doctors that lawmakers also have previously extended.
It's the second package of legislation that Senate Democrats have labeled as a jobs bill this year, joining a $15 billion measure approved by the Senate last week.
GOP Sens. Kit Bond (Mo.), Susan Collins (Maine), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), David Vitter (La.) and George Voinovich (Ohio) voted for the bill.
We're a long way off from an economic recovery that puts everyone back to work who wants to work.
Thank you for continuing to provide relief to those who need it in this time of great need.
CA_Berkeley_WV in the comments of One Citizen's post:
I watched the Senate Finance and Health Committee markups live blogging most of it before that big check for Soros arrived I bought new pajamas and a case of Cheetos.
I watched the voting patters of West Virginia native Sen. Tom Carper D-DE, MR Ducks Sen. Blanche Lincoln D-AR, very serious Sen. Jeff Bingaman D-NM and budget scold Sen. Kent Conrad D-ND.
Did you watch all the HELP and all the Finance markups to come to this conclusion? Do you know what amendments were defeated? Rockefeller offered his, made his pitch, and then acknowled that it would be defeated. So did Sen. Wyden D-OR. Sen. Schumer D-NY did not have much luck either, and he may end up the next majority leader.
Would the general public know as much as we do about rescission without the Commerce Committee hearing Sen. Rockefeller held that took testimony from Wendell Potter, whistleblower? Around midnight that last night another thought this was a great Rockefeller quote:
Children from CHIP shouldn't have to go to the exchange, where "insurance companies would...have them for lunch."
Statements in the press are often directed to other members and are the best window we have on consensus building. How a bill gets cobbled together is ugly. Sen. Wyden certainly was not happy with the concessions given between 11:30PM and midnight to Sen. Rockefeller the last night. I know Conrad's legislative director. He got the concessions he wanted. You can't manufacture votes.
Public Option cannot be introduced into the sidecar. It will not stand a Byrd Rule and a point of order. Parliamentarian Emeritus Robert Dove cannot remember being overruled by the chair alone on one of these. This whip got to 51 last fall, John Tester D-MT last one counted. Waiving the Byrd Rule is a 60 vote lift. CBO score on the sidecar today. House vote next week.
States can setup single payer under the Senate bill, so some focus should shift. Congress is not doing this this term, but the long term effort is worth it. Intimating that Rockefeller benefited from stock trades during the markup by linking to Page Not Found Error 404 as a bludgeon, unwisely wielded at this time.
reflecting subsidies provided through insurance exchanges, increased net outlays for Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and tax credits for small employers
That is what Rockefeller traded. Add that to Sen. Sanders I-CT community health clinics and I am not ready to cut off my nose to spite my aching toe.
Good evening, West Virginia Blue readers. This is your open thread to discuss all things Hill-related. Use this thread to praise or bash Congresscritters, share a juicy tip, ask questions, offer critiques and suggestions, or post manifestos.
Copyright 2009 West Virginia Blue
Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, the tireless efforts of volunteer contributors and continued participation from this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong soley to their respective authors.
