Category — Energy

Peter Roskam was on NBC 5’s City Desk this past Sunday morning for a softball interview with host Mary Ann Ahern. Roskam opened with his usual complaints about a dysfunctional (read that as Democratic) Congress. He wants you to believe that he’s a reasonable guy who just wants to get thing s done for you but he’s stymied at every turn by less responsible members who are only interested in partisan politics and serving the needs of special interests.

Roskam is not telling you the truth. He is not only one of the most partisan members of Congress but also one of the most slavishly devoted to special interests.

During the current Congress, Peter Roskam has voted with his party 93.2% of the time. There are only 17 out of a total of 435 members, Republican or Democrat, who have voted more consistently with their party than Roskam. They are:

1. Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA), 93.9%
2. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), 93.8%
3. Rep. David Davis (R-TN), 93.8%
4. Rep. Gary Miller (R-CA), 93.8%
5. Rep. Stevan Pearce (R-NM), 93.8%
6. Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), 93.8%
7. Rep. Mike Ross (D-AR), 93.7%
8. Rep. David Dreier (R-CA), 93.6%
9. Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), 93.6%
10. Rep. Jim McCrery (R-LA), 93.6%
11. Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), 93.6%
12. Rep. Zachary Wamp (R-TN), 93.6%
13. Rep. John Mica (R-FL), 93.5%
14. Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL), 93.4%
15. Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT), 93.3%
16. Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD), 93.3%
17. Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA), 93.3%

It should be noted that only 4 out of 17 of these are Democrats. So Roskam is among the most hyper-partisan representatives and a member of the most hyper-partisan party. He is upset, not because of partisanship, but because his party is in the minority. He should be reminded that this is the case because his party proved to be massively corrupt in the previous Congresses and because it launched a preemptive aggressive war against a sovereign power which posed no real threat, sent a few thousand brave American men and women to their graves in that cause, and mortgaged our children’s future to pay for it all.

As for special interests, Roskam has compiled an impressive record, voting the position of the National Association of Manufacturers 100% of the time during his first term. Doing this has meant voting against the interests of the residents who live in his district on issues like equal pay for equal work, Medicare prescription drug price negotiation, and parity in mental health benefits for members of group health plans.

Roskam also spent a good deal of time on the show talking about high gasoline prices and the need for alternative energy sources. Roskam’s record however is one of obstructing Democratic efforts in this regard and voting instead in favor of protecting the big oil companies who are currently gouging us, all the while accepting substantial campaign contributions from the energy sector.

So 6th District residents, it is not Congress that is dysfunctional. It’s your Congressman. But don’t worry, we’re going to replace him this fall.

[Progress Illinois has a post today about Roskam's attempt to justify his vote against the new GI bill on the same program]

The United States Chamber of Commerce recently honored Peter Roskam for proving in his first term to be “an effective ally to the business community”.

Sounds great until you realize what exactly “being an effective ally to the business community” means.

Put simply, it means consistently voting against the interests of the majority of citizens in your district and giving big business exactly what it demands.

It means means Roskam voting against reducing the dependence on fossil fuels that is threatening our national security and destroying our environment by requiring minimum standards for the percentage of electricity generated using renewable sources of energy.

It means Roskam voting against tax incentives for energy conservation and development of clean, renewable energy sources because they are funded by the repeal of tax breaks to big oil companies now enjoying huge profits at our expense every time we fill up our tanks.

It means Roskam voting against the Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007 which would have insured that Illinois’ uninsured children receive the kind of health care that Roskam’s own kids get at taxpayer expense.

It means Roskam standing up for the interests of big drug companies rather than allowing the Medicare program to negotiate for better prices on prescription drugs.

It means Roskam voting against protection of his constituents right to equal pay for equal work. And their right to organize.

And it means Roskam voting against protecting middle class taxpayers from the Alternative Minimum Tax.

So congratulations on your big award, Peter, and thanks for nothing. Its time we had a new Representative in Congress who works for us and not for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

(Aside to Peter: I apologize, Peter, if I haven’t been paying as much attention to you lately as I should. Hanging on to my own job has been keeping me busy day and night and I just haven’t had much time for politics. But rest assured I’m going to keep doing my part to help send you back to your cushy personal injury attorney gig and leave this governing business to the ungrateful hoi polloi. BTW, thanks for the robo calls. Nice to know you care enough to have your machine call me.)

This past week, Democrats in the House passed a measure designed to give a boost to efforts to develop new sources of clean, renewable energy and promote increased energy independence while protecting the environment.

Peter Roskam, our Representative in the 6th Congressional district, was not on board.

The bill, Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008, H.R. 5351, would, if enacted, extend a number of tax credits, now set to expire, to support alternative technologies such as solar energy, fuel cells, and alternative-fueled vehicles, and to support making commercial and residential properties more energy-efficient. New tax credits would also be created for investment in clean renewable energy and energy conservation bonds.

The bill would fund these tax credits by fiscally sound means - repealing certain tax breaks given to Big Oil companies by the Bush Adminisistration, the same companies now making record profits selling us high-priced gasoline, natural gas, and heating-oil. Gasoline prices at the pump have more than doubled since George W. Bush took office. (The G.O.P. really isthe “Gas and Oil Party”). Looking out my window as I write I see the lowest price at the BP near me to be $3.23. That was probably a buck-fifty at the end of the Clinon administration.

When he voted on this bill, Peter Roskam had the opportunity to do take a bite out of the high costs of energy for his constituents while promoting new jobs for them in them green technologies industries, helping them upgrade to energy-conserving technologies, and enhancing their security by reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. At the same time, Roskam, who occasionally like to portray himself as an environmentalist, could have taken a small step toward promoting a cleaner environment and reducing the impact of global climate change.

Roskam chose not to do so.

Instead, he chose to protect the huge profits being earned by Big Oil and lend yet another “rubber stamp” of approval to the Bush administration’s project of promoting rule by corporations over rule by the people.

Roskam doesn’t explain his vote on his web site. (He doesn’t even list energy in the “Issues” section). But, like Bush, I don’t think he believes he has to be accountable to the voters. He believes he is in a safe Republican district. But I think we’ll show him this fall just how unsafe his district can be for a Representative who ignores the interests of the voters.

Peter Roskam sided again today with corporate interests and with George Bush and voted no on a major Democratic initiative to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, improve the fuel efficiency of the cars we drive, and begin to address the problem of global climate change which is threatening our very existence.

Roskam and most of his Republican colleagues voted against the Energy Independence and Security Act because it provided for the repeal of a tax break with which the Republicans had gifted Big Oil back in 2005 when they were in the majority. Roskam’s vote was yet another “rubber stamp” of George Bush’s policies (Bush has threatened to veto the bll if it is approved in the Senate) and the latest example of Roskam’s pattern of consitently favoring corporate interests over the welfare of his constituency.

The bill, which passed in the House despite Roskam’s vote, would if enacted into law:

• Raise overall automotive fuel efficiency standards to 35 mpg for cars, trucks, and SUVs by the year 2020, a 40% increase over present rates
• Require electric utilities to generate at least 15% of their power output from renewable sources such as wind and solar energy, also by 2020
• Require the increased use of biofuels such as ethanol
• Provide tax breaks for energy efficiency and for the use of renewable fuels
• Offset the cost of those tax breaks by repealing previous tax breaks given to big oil companies by the Bush Administration and the previous Republican Congress
• Provide assistance to small businesses in conserving energy
• Train workers for jobs, such as retrofitting of buildings, that promote greater energy efficiency
• Begin to address the threat of global warming by increasing efficiency in our use of fossil fuels

An analysis of the proposed renewable energy standards for utilities prepared by the Union of Concerned Scientists suggests that the standards could save U.S. consumers as much as $18 billion in energy costs each year, in addition to the $24 billion in savings from improved automobile fuel economy.

The Republicans still hope to stop the bill in the Senate, perhaps using a filibuster. If not, Bush will likely veto the bill, then try to blame the Democrats for not getting any thing done. This is their game plan, obstruct then accuse. But these guys are in the pocket of the oil companies and I think most Americans will be smart enough to recognize it.