So Mark Kirk, Republican Senate candidate in Illinois and
current House member who helped provide the margin of victory for
the Waxman-Markey capntade bill, has just
defended his vote as follows:
In Warrenville, Kirk repeated previous explanations that meeting
with business owners all over Illinois helped him better understand
the legislation’s harm. ‘We make a lot of errors in Congress, not
out of malice or corruption. It’s out of ignorance and lack of
understanding of how a $14 trillion economy operates,’ Kirk said.
‘As I traveled Illinois, I quickly saw the kind of damage that
legislation would cause industries that were not heavily present in
my congressional district: heavy manufacturing, agriculture,
mining. I had to make a choice between higher employment in my
state or sticking with the old vote.’
Ah. After the vote he went out and learned about its
impact on the economy (he has previously said he voted in
the interests of his North Shore district, only, which includes a
lot of traders dependent on ‘rents’ from the scheme…).
Sounds familiar with the way things have been working in
Washington “we don’ need to read no stinkin’ bill!” DC.
After the June 2009 vote, the Congressional Budget Office
released a May 2010 analysis, including that:
“In particular, job losses in the industries that shrink would
lower employment more than job gains in other industries would
increase employment, thereby raising the overall unemployment
rate.”
It also notes that real incomes would drop. And, of course,
those who had read it (no one who voted on it) would have known
that the biill has 2 years of assistance for workers who lose their
jobs from industry sectors expressly identified as sure to take
a wallop as a result of this ‘jobs bill’.
Remember Henry Waxman’s fury on June 26, 2009 when John Boehner
began to read aloud on the floor some of the 300 pages inserted
into the bill at 1 a.m. that morning to line up the votes needed to
pass capntrade? Waxman’s complaint was that some of his Members
would miss their flights if Boehner read the bill which no one had
yet read, before Members were told to vote on it. Sadly, Boehner
merely put on some good theater instead of making them miss their
flights (but he did seem to find his sea legs at about that moment
and has been a much improved leader since).
So read the dang bill might be a good slogan going into
the next Congress (along with “no taxpayer bailout for
California”…if that state’s voters decline to suspend their own
capntradde suicide note, AB 32, by passing Prop 23 today, and/or
otherwise compound the self-imposed misery with more damaging
gesture politics, then there is simply no reason the rest of this
should pick up the tab for their folly. Enough moral hazard from
our political class.)
A failure to read the bills got us House passage of
capntrade and, it seems likely, a new majority in the House. Maybe
you should start drafting fewer “Christmas tree” bills and more
bills that fix the problem, and that you read before you vote on
them? Just a thought. Or, in a couple of years, maybe the
next crowd will think of such things.
Jr. Booger| 11.2.10 @ 12:36PM
From the Desk of Mark Kirk,
Dear Citizens of Illinois, American, and the World,
Now that I the voters in Illinois have elected me to the seat formerly held by President Barack Hussein Obama, I wish have come clean about several things, not the least of which is my vote for the Cap-n-Trade bill. As you know, we make a lot of errors in Congress, not out of malice or corruption, but out of the malice and corruption of others, specifically Rahm Emmanuel and Barry Obama. In short, Rahm threatened me while I was fully clothed in the shower at the Congressional gym where I had been playing racketball with the Congressional personal trainer, with the threat that the Chicago Climate Exchange would quit paying money to my carbon saving constituents (ie. Fish) and even wagged a recently dead fish at me to illustrate the point.
But now I understand how a $14 trillion economy operates due to my first ever field trip to Southern Illinois (I was playing hooky to go to a Cubs game during the field trip in 8th grade). In the trip I saw firsthand people going to work, trucks delivering goods, tractors in the field, and I thought, “Damn, stuff doesn’t all come from a government check.” I even allowed myself to envision a world where everybody not making money from carbon trading (while saving the planet) would receive a government unemployment check. At first I smiled that inane smile of mine, but then I realized there wouldn’t be any work getting done and those rustic cornfields in the southern part of the great Prairie State would not exist. Of course by Southern Illinois, I mean south of south Chicago.
So as to preserve our great heritage and industry, I will now vote against Cap-n-Trade in the Senate (because it will be passed before I take my seat) and I will continue the tradition of voting for ethanol subsidies.
Sincerely,
Mark Kirk, Senator elect
Irish22| 11.2.10 @ 2:26PM
Well put. How can any self-respecting politician vote for something that even the President acknowledges will raise everyone's costs of living. Those of us who lived through the 70's "oil crisis" understand that any increase in the cost of oil means a decrease in our standard of living. Carbon trading is based on a hoax: another government program designed to benefit the few at a great cost to the many.