Filed under: Legislation and Policy
Fuel economy bill has seventy percent chance of passage
The new compromise energy bill that was announced over the weekend will almost certainly get passed by the Democrat-controlled Congress starting with the House of Representatives this week. Unfortunately there is still that pesky issue of a possible presidential veto. An anonymous Washington lobbyist told BloggingStocks that the bill currently has about a 70/30 chance of becoming law. The main issues are some of the renewable energy requirements for utilities and potential tax increases that may get tacked on. If the tax provisions are left off and some adjustments are made to the renewable energy rules, the bill will probably go through. If not, there probably won't be enough votes to override a veto without the changes. [Source: BloggingStocks]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mort 10:31AM (12/05/2007)
Thanks for the upchuck picture.
Reply
Domenick 10:36AM (12/05/2007)
Man, that's just what I was thinking. >_<
Reply
bluegreen 12:22PM (12/05/2007)
Where does that 70% chance come from??? Hasn't Bush already said he will veto it? Looks like Dingell has outmaneuvered the House leadership. He can count on Bush to veto the bill without him looking like he's obstructing environmental progress. In the end his constituents, the auto industry, still win.
Reply
Tim 12:55PM (12/05/2007)
What I hate about these bills is that they all include the words "...and for other purposes" in their title so the socialists and Neocons can throw in unrelated pork and special consideration kickbacks to their corporate and special interest sponsors.
There should be ONE bill for EACH purpose so arm twisting, extortion and back room deals couldn’t’ happen. Then again, the legislature is made up of mostly lawyers so you know that backroom deals are happening and NONE of these "deals" are good for "We the People".
If your favorite legislator is also a lawyer, don’t vote for him/her because they are automatically guilty of conflict of interest because they will ultimately make money by litigating the laws they write.
It's impossible for lawyers to be honest because they are trained to make their living by either telling half-truths or by twisting the meaning of words.
Reply
RG 2:29PM (12/05/2007)
It could be worse. It could be Hillary.
Reply
MarkR 2:56PM (12/05/2007)
I'm with Tim on his response. Also, I don't blame Bush for sticking to his guns on some of his issues.
If they threw other pork on the bill such as tax increases etc. I'd probably veto as well.
That is the problem with our system. All the unrelated crap that gets put on bills to secure votes. 1 issue should equal 1 bill.
Reply
bioburner 7:27PM (12/05/2007)
I'm not up on my politics but doesn't the prez have "line item veto" power to hack out crap he doesn't want?
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 10:21PM (12/05/2007)
Bioburner, The president does not have a line item veto. The president can only sign or veto an entire bill. Congress passed a limited line item veto law in the mid nineties but the supreme court struck it down because the constitution does not allow for it.
Reply
gsolman6 11:55PM (12/05/2007)
"If they threw other pork on the bill such as tax increases etc. I'd probably veto as well."
Is it tax increases that are proposed or rather repeals of tax breaks that the energy industry has enjoyed? They already have the ability to drill on taxpayer owned lands royalty-free so I don't mind at all shifting more of the burden on them.
Reply