December 12, 2007 03:30 PM
Jack Cafferty: How Much Influence Should Corporations Have Over Energy Legislation?
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather for vids)
Jack Cafferty asked the question yesterday on The Situation Room - How much influence should corporations have over energy legislation? In his own unique, and grumbly way, Jack points out that our dependence on foreign oil is the reason for much of America's trouble right now, but that won't stop the lobbyists (and President Bush) who spend grotesque amounts of money to fight any and all legislation that would raise cafe standards for our automobiles. Jack at his finest...
none
Ours is a government by, and for the corporation. They have all the influence money can buy. Good old America Inc.
How about... None?
Zero
Bush will veto the bill at the behest of Dick Cheney, whose pockets are stuffed full of millions of oil dollars.
I did like the suggestion made by one responder -- to give tax incentives to companies that research and develop ways to save energy, a more positive less time-dependent way to achieve the same goal, perhaps even more quickly than 2020 thant making it a requirement.
Zed!
Zip and Zero. And take away their damned tax cuts/credits too.
Less than 0, if that's possible.
anney @ 5:
Which outsourcing companies do you recommend?
Senate republicans blocked an energy bill today that repeals the tax breaks Bush & Co. gave the oil companies in 2004 & 2005. The write ups on this story say the Democrats were trying to push through a bill with billions in new taxes on oil companies, when most of the "new" taxes were simply to get back to the taxes the oil companies should have been paying all along.
Republicans HEART big oil.
Another vote for xero
Should Red Bull?
0
Is it true the Weakly Standard is suing Red Bull for copyright infringement?
And just for the record, I am still steaming because MSNBC found talking about baseball players taking steroids more important than covering a presidential candidate debate. How the hell do they justify that and why should I give a damn about what some individual professional sports figures do? Shouldn't this be a case for the law enforcement community instead of our government? I mean, I don't know but I do believe who will be our next president is a hell of a lot more relevant than who juiced in baseball.
The energy bill was like allowing burglars to make the laws about theft. Chances are they are going to protect their own asses. And they did.
Since corporations have the public in generals best interest at heart, a big roaring YES!!! to that one.NO, of course not!.
Dems got flat played today....HR 6 should have been passed.
McCain is a coward, and Mary Landrieu, don't even get me started.
She's not thinking of her constituents jobs...she's thinking about her meal ticket. Another con-servative corporate Dem who's not even trying to masquerade as a moderate, might as well change her to an 'R'...
Either Reid is completely incompetent, ok, he is. Time to get another majority leader, when you miss something this important by 1 vote....ridiculous.
Very upset with this...DNC better rail on Landrieu
pissed off patricia @ 15:
Cafferty rips it up. I don't always agree with him...but so what. This guy rips it up.
"Enter the big oil and car lobbyist" Surprise
Lets see, government for the people, by the people... none.
The second letter in the video says that the free market will find a solution quicker than any law requirement. This arguement may work on paper, but in reality it is flawed.
The general public clearly wants more fuel efficient cars, in fact I don't know anybody who doesn't want their car to be more fuel efficient (even if it is an H3). The automakers know this, yet they claim there is no technology out there to reach these goals. But in reality, there is plenty of fuel efficiency technology out there that they have not even tried to implement, or have been very reluctant, into mass market cars (i.e. hydraulic hybrids, standard variable compression ration engines, switching off cylinders, preheating the intake air, etc.). The real reason for their opposition is to protect their investments. Automakers have money invested in the oil industry, which means producing higher fuel efficiency cars will hurt their investement portfolios.
Thus, the only way to facillitate a change is for our government to get involved. Frankly, I don't disagree with giving automakers subsidies or tax breaks, only of those tax cuts or subsidies are tied to meeting stricter regulations. That way, the subsidy gets reinvested back into infrastructure, new technology, and in the long run improves the quality of our society and our environment.
The American Revolution was fought in large part to throw off precisely the kind of economic bondage we suffer today - complicity between the government and the corporations in ruling the people.
The earliest corporations chartered in this country (after the Revolution) existed only for limited purpose and limited time and were only allowed clearly defined profit. Corporate officers were personally liable for malfeasance by the corporation - and the corporate charter could be revoked.
But an 1886 Supreme Court case granted "personhood" to corporations .. and the Robber Barons haven't let up since.
Click this link & then on the menu in the left margin for more information.
Unequal Protection:
The rise of corporate dominance
and theft of human rights
a new book by Thom Hartmann
Thom Hartmann's Main Site
Dear Jack,
The amount of influence corporations have over public energy policy should be equal to the amount of responsibility they are taking for our current energy crisis. This could be a complicated figure so I'll calculate it for them: ZERO.
Nil, zero, none, 0
Related:
Bitter Divisions at Climate Talks
By THOMAS FULLER and ELISABETH ROSENTHAL
Published: December 14, 2007
NUSA DUA, Indonesia — Amid growing frustration with the United States in deadlocked negotiations at a United Nations conference on global warming, the European Union threatened Thursday to boycott separate talks proposed by the Bush administration in Hawaii next month.
...
The goal of the Bali meeting, which is being attended by delegates from 190 countries and which is scheduled to end Friday, is to reach agreement on a “roadmap” for a future deal to reduce greenhouse gases.
The escalating bitterness between the European Union and United States came as former Vice President Al Gore told delegates in a speech that “my own country, the United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali.”
...
He urged delegates to agree an open-ended deal here that could be enhanced after the Bush Administration leaves office and United States policy changes.
“Over the next two years the United States is going to be somewhere it is not now,” Mr. Gore said to loud applause. “You must anticipate that.”
...
The United States and the European Union remain at odds on many major points, including whether an agreement signed here should include numerical targets, a move that the United States and a few other countries, including Russia, oppose.
(article continues)
read on:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/14/world/14climate.html?hp
lobbyists and the oil industry don't want cafe standards raised because they're capitalist greedheads and that's ok by gawd (waves the american flag) because that's what they're supposed to do. chimpy on the other hand doesn't want cafe standards raised because he's a gawddamned traitor who wants to sell us out to his oil buddies and opec (nuff said, rant over).
don't forget Hillary voted for the Kyl Lieberman amendment. Warmonger? Sure looks like it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npzN3dZR6JM
How much influence should corporations have over energy legislation?
hmm...
I have some better questions.
).How much influence do energy corporations actually have on our foreign policy?
).How much influence did energy corporations have on chimpies decision to invade Iraq?
).How much influence do energy corporations have on the price of oil?
).What percentage of energy corporations employees are American.
).Are energy corporations paying American taxes... or have they re-located to Dubai...(like Halliburton)?
Yup, over the past 50 yrs or so, corporations have legislated their way out of taxes (and employing expensive Americans)...and legislated their way into our foreign policy and hence... other countries.
Not only have the Bastardly traitorous corporation all moved away...
But they seem to be exerting more political influence than ever before.
I think they completely own the media.
I think its a coup Mr Cafferty. and they (you know who) are payin your salary Jack.
The reason oil companies - or any corporations, for that matter - hold such sway in the US is because it is a two party system.
It's not just a matter of the US not having a "green" party with a significant number of votes, it's also because all stable democracies in the world (except the US because it's no longer stable) have at least three political parties. When minority governments rule, it means small and independent parties can dictate policy of senior partners - if the small party doesn't get what it wants sometimes, it votes against the government and that government is overthrown.
A minority government makes it near impossible for one voting block to control the entire country. When power is shared, it's easier for the smaller voices to be heard and harder for lobbyists to have as much influence.
NONE.
What is it with "free market as a religion" people? OK, then why hasn't the "free market" already found the solution? The answer is that without appropriate government oversight, there is no "free market", just as there is no "fair football game" without any refs. Both situations quickly devolve into anarchy at first, then bloodthirsty, petty dictators ringed with protection, willing to destroy anything in their path or that upsets their personal agenda. That's no way to find answers...
But suppose this person's "free market" messiah WAS the answer? Why not pursue a government course as well? What are they so afraid of? I mean, if the government is ALWAYS so sloppy, and the market so sharp, I'm sure that private industry will completely out-invent the government, right? So fund both programs and watch what happens...
Or you could just pay attention to reality. Where the big, bad "government" has been the source of countless inventions and technologies that quietly pass into the marketplace where they are trumpeted by private companies. As far as technology, the National Labs, ARE the genesis of the free market. No private company could make the a-bomb or the internet. The government had to step into provide electricity to all, and ensure fair access to telephone service. Likewise GPS, and satellite launching. Yet this Republican government heavily subsidizes oil because the "free market" can't even seem to get that right, apparently. Record profits, and trillions of dollars, but they still have to have their poor wittle hands held and be paid tons of pork. Huh.
It's not surprising. Corporate culture is all about outsourcing and cost-cutting these days. R&D takes a far back seat. And why not? As long as next quarter looks good (screw next year) you get your $400 million parachute, whether your management is good or bad. The execs are "free" not to be competent to still earn a fortune. Does that sound like a recipe for successful, voluntary innovation to you?
We've seen what the unrestricted "free market" does in these last many years of an extreme Republican court, Republican congress, and Republican president. It seems clear that given compete freedom, the market would rather outsource all employees, pay big fat bribes to the government for handouts of taxpayer money, and if any competition accidentally happens, either get income from frivolous lawsuits, or just merge into one or two giant companies to make a monopoly or duopoly in the market. Yeah, that's worked just great.
The "corporations" need no input, because there are MANY corporations. Some will benefit from bribes to keep the status quo. Some will become fantastically wealth by providing new technology or services when the standards change. "The corporations" as a group stand to profit either way. The citizen looses with the status quo. So why bother to ask -- corporate input is as consistent (the richest companies to lobby are obviously always for the status quo, think about it) as it is meaningless.
DISCORD AT BALI CLIMATE CONFERENCE
EU Threatens to Boycott US Climate Talks
By Markus Becker in Bali, Indonesia
With only one more day to go, the tone at the UN climate conference on Bali has taken a decidedly sour turn. The European Union has threatened to boycott US-led climate change talks unless the US agrees to concrete targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
read on:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,523211,00.html
Photo showing a protester in Bali "A Rope for Mr. Bush":
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,grossbild-1046024-52321...
Hydrogen Car Is Here, a Bit Ahead of Its Time
...Until now, writing about fuel cells has been a no-risk proposition, with no reality check looming, no looking back when the cars arrived in showrooms to see whether one had been embarrassingly optimistic. Way back in the 1990s, a physicist assured me that fuel-cell cars were 20 years away — and always would be.
Honda has a different timeline; it considers this version of the FCX a production car, ready to roll into showrooms from a manufacturing and operational standpoint.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/automobiles/autoreviews/09HONDA.html?_...
US AT THE BALI CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The American Gap between Words and Deeds
By Markus Becker and Holger Dambeck in Bali, Indonesia and San Francisco
It sounds good -- at first. The US says it wants to be part of a climate treaty and looks forward to a new chapter in climate policy. But a closer look reveals that Washington continues to torpedo any concrete agreement.
When it comes to climate change, America's image in the world is hardly the best. Wherever countries are trying to limit emissions of greenhouse gases, the US -- and especially the administration of President George W. Bush -- is seen as a dangerous spoil-sport, doing what it can to torpedo far-reaching climate agreements.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,523027,00.html
Ron @ 9:
All American companies, Ron, located IN the US. I recall reading years and years ago about people and small companies that had built very small cars, for instance, that used very little non-petroleum fuel. I occasionally read about energy ideas or technicques or inventions that have already been patented or copyrighted, usually by individuals or small groups. A LOT of individuals are way ahead of the energy companies, and dammit, their contributions to better, cleaner, and more efficient living should be allowed into the mainstream.
One that I recall was a solar-powered heat-producing tape that could be woven into clothing for skiers and people who spend time in the cold.
It's really amazing what the geniuses among us have come up with, and we don't know most of it.
Oh, come on.... this is like asking a sock puppet, "how much influence does the hand up your ass have in what you do?"
Hello CNN. Want a hit show like Olbermman? Well you have one waiting to happen in Jack Cafferty.
To me this is just another example of what's wrong with our political system. Right now we've got too many politicians who are more than willing to put money before the best interests of their constituents, or even the country.
Cafferty is right, part of problem is our dependency on oil. We have corporations and even our government screwing people over for their natural resources and of course they're going to take offense.
Let's not forget, the Bush family makes their money from oil, so the administration blocking any new energy bills is no surprise at all.
the economic royalists and robber barons can go to hell
bobswire @ 37:
Damn straight! If they gave Jack his own show I would end my boycott of CNN
Let's all remember to email the GOP wannabe Senator Mary Landrieu from La. She's the only "Democrat" that voted against this to make it veto proof. It's time for her to "officially" switch parties.
Obviously, NONE.
How much influence should corporations have over anything? No more than any average person, or possibly, less.
.... of the people, by the people, for the people ... oh well ...
Your gov't is run by corporations whose main interests are driven by greed.
Good luck.
Who says that a corporation should have any influence over anything? Corporations exist to please the rest of us, if we would only exert the political power that is ours for the asking.
Obama is connected with the nuclear industry, just check out hw much Exelon Corp has contributed to him. The expansions in nuclear energy that he's proposing would mean more contaminated water, more weapons proliferation, more expensive electricity, and more gobal warming. It is NOT a part of the solution to climate change, because the subsidies it requires woud take away from renewable investment and investment in making coal plants more efficient and cleaner. When one looks at the entire nuclear cycle, one sees that a lot of greenhouse gas emmisions are produced through mining, transport, infrastructure, and eternal waste management. Edwards has expressed his oppostion to nuclear.
If only there was a lobby from "BIG WIND"
Why do we even need to ask this question? Influence? They should have zero, none, nada! If it were possible to have less than zero influence I'd say that! Has anyone ever heard of "conflicting interests?" But that phrase doesn't mean anything in DC. Damn I hate our government sometimes (most of the time).
Jack Cafferty needs a show on CNN like a diabetic needs insulin. If I were MSNBC I'd snatch him up. Imagine an all-star line-up of Maddows, Olbermann, and Cafferty. O'Reilly would have an aneurisim.
Government by corporation is fascism.
.
CORPRATISM = FASCISM
WE R IT
.
How about those companies which actually conrtibute to lobbying for envirnmental change. How would you exclude them? It's the culture not the system.
I haven't lived in the States for quite a while and I've been wondering if anyone in the mainstream media has asked Bush how much he personally has earned on the war. I imagine a huge amount of his stocks are in big oil and he probably earned a fortune from the war he started. I know this seems to be a bit off topic but I find it the ultimate extreme of what Cafferty describes. This man kills people for his stock options. It is unfortunately as simple as that.
How much influence? NONE. Perhaps an advisory role would be appropriate, but it should not be industry who leads but rather the people. Industry should do what the people tell it to do. If the people say that we want cleaner air, fewer emissions, etc. then industry should do exactly that... or sell their businesses to people who will. We've wasted so many years and so much time waiting for industry and "the market" to bring us products like cars that don't use fossil fuels, but at each and every step the industry fights any change. WE ARE THE MOST TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED NATION ON THIS PLANET. WE PUT MEN ON THE MOON OVER 40 YEARS AGO!!! WE CAN DO ANYTHING IF WE SET OUR MINDS TO IT. It is time for the people to get in the drivers seat, decide on a plan and then we all get to it. We need leaders who aren't in the back pockets of the capital class and who are true democrats, i.e., actually care what the people want and are willing to yield to the people's desires and not simply indulging their own personal agenda at the cost of the people.
wisconsin @ 47:
Yeah! Because if there were one, all of our energy problems would be solved. We could just set up a couple of those wind turbines on the floors of the House and Senate and in the President's briefing room, at all the candidate debates, etc., etc., etc. With all that hot air just think of how much energy we could generate!? %:}
Seriously, to say that we've moved to fascism is an understatement. The corporations
(or "the military-industrial complex" as DDE called it) own the politicians, set the national policy, rob the citizens (i.e., take their money for crappy stuff, ruin their health by creating pollution and poisoned goods), and control most of the wealth of the world with their friends in the Fed, World Bank, etc. To rail about corps controlling energy policy is laughable at this point.....
It's what the sheeple want.
Comments are closed on this entry