Peter Roskam Sides with Polluters Over Planet – On the Wrong Side of History

On June 30, 2009, in Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, by RSR
1

On Friday, June 26, the House of Representatives passed the historic Waxman-Markley comprehensive energy bill by a vote of 219 to 212. H.R. 2454, formally titled the American Clean energy and Security Act of 2009 includes a market-based cap & trade global warming reduction plan designed to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 17% by the year 2020. This is not where we need to be. It is thought that we will have to reduce emissions 80% by 2050 in order to stabilize the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere at a level that prevent the worst consequences of global warming. Still the bill is a start and it has won praise from environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC):

“The House of Representatives has made a dramatic breakthrough for America’s future by choosing to create jobs, move to clean energy, and reduce global warming pollution. The passage of this legislation, which was almost unimaginable six months ago, will help set our country in a new direction by shifting to a clean energy economy and reducing the carbon pollution that causes global warming.

“While passing the bill through the House took hard work and compromises on many sides, this is strong and vital legislation that Congress needs to deliver to the President’s desk this year. This bill will help create new jobs in manufacturing and clean technology. It will increase energy efficiency, help consumers save on energy bills, and protect lower-income families. And it will finally put our country on a course to limit the carbon pollution that causes global warming.

Sadly our own Congressman, Republican Peter Roskam, was not a party to that “hard work and compromise”. Roskam voted against the bill, choosing to support the narrow interests of his big campaign donors from the energy sector, who opposed the bill, rather than act to save the planet from an impending catastrophe that threatens the  welfare of our children and of generations to come.

OpenSecrets.org, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics, today released data demonstrating how the industries that have worked to oppose climate change legislation gave, on average, twice the amount of campaign contributions to legislators, Democrat and Republican alike, who, like Roskam, opposed the legislation, as they did to those voting in favor. The table below compares contributions received by industry for the average “yes” voter on H.R. 2454, the average, “no” voter, and for Peter Roskam. Bear in mind that while contributions are totaled back to 1989, Roskam has only been running since 2006.

Industry Yes Voters Avg No Voters Avg Roskam
Energy Sector $124,181 $274,021 $240,765
Oil & Gas $31,663 $120,566 $138,815
Electric utilities $67,013 $102,370 $73,800
Coal Mining $2,279 $12,004 $1,000
Construction $138,569 $241,079 $297,517
Automakers $10,603 $11,982 $0
Business PACs $1,380,210 $1,901,371 $,1529,147
Environmentalists $21,198 $3,088 $0
Alternative Energy $1,250 $869 $0

You can draw your own conclusions but in my estimation this speaks volumes about why Roskam votes as he does.

The climate bill will now have to be taken up by the Senate where the fight is likely to be even tougher than it was in the House. I predict that 6th District residents will be hearing a lot more lobbying against the bill by our Congressman.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Peter Roskam Lies About Colombia Anti-Union Violence On Fox News Infomercial for TPA, Caterpillar

On May 31, 2009, in Colombia, Organized Labor, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, by RSR
0

This is not breaking news, by any means. I just came upon this clip while browsing Roskam’s YouTube collection. It is from back on February 12, 2009.The House Labor and Education Committee had just heard testimony that anti-labor violence was on the increase in 2008 and that the goverment has been, if not complicit in the killings, negligent in the prosecution of those responsible:

“Despite the great emphasis the current administration is placing on security, after a few years of declining murder rates, violence against labor unions showed a steep increase in 2008”, said Jose Luciano Sanin, director of the Escuela Nacional Sindical (National Labor School). “More than 60 percent of the all murdered unionists in the world are Colombians. The murder rate of unionists in Colombia is five times that of the rest of the countries of the world, including those countries with dictatorships that have banned union activity.”

“Despite the great emphasis the current administration is placing on security, after a few years of declining murder rates, violence against labor unions showed a steep increase in 2008”, said Jose Luciano Sanin, director of the Escuela Nacional Sindical (National Labor School). “More than 60 percent of the all murdered unionists in the world are Colombians. The murder rate of unionists in Colombia is five times that of the rest of the countries of the world, including those countries with dictatorships that have banned union activity.”

Human rights advocates in Colombia contend that many of these killings were planned the leadership of the country’s right-wing paramilitary organization, the A.U.C, as well as the Colombian military, and national police. Although some prosecutions are being conducted, witnesses testified, prosecutions often stop short from holding those who conspired, ordered or paid for anti-labor murders accountable.

“It is a systematic pattern that in all of these criminal acts, the public prosecutor is content to determine the responsibility of the material authors, leaving out the intellectual authors, who are the most important, given that they are the ones who sponsor, order the executions, put up the money, and always remain in impunity,” said Jose Nirio Sanchez, a former Colombian special court judge for labor-homicide cases. “Thus, these crimes will not stop, since the true perpetrators are not prosecuted.”

So the very same day, Peter Roskam goes on on FOX to actively promote the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, citing what a boon it would be to Caterpillar, one of his major campaign contributors, and saying how labor leaders and labor organizers  in Colombia are less likely to to be subject to violence than the rest of the population.

Every time I think I might like this guy a little, he reminds me what a bastard he is. We have been having a national conversation about whether empathy is a valuable quality in a Supreme Court justice. Even if it you think it is not, it is certainly something whe should expect in our representatives in Congress. Roskam is absolutely blind to human suffering, both at home in his district and in the world. I guess that’s what enables him to sleep at night as he uses our seat in Congress to promote his ruthless pro-corporate agenda.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Peter Roskam’s 8 Part Plan to Halt Global Climate Change

On May 21, 2009, in Energy, Environment, Global Warming, Peter Roskam, by RSR
0

roskam_plan

Peter Roskam has been conducting more of those taxpayer-funded dinnertime robo-calls, this time to roll out his new plan to address the threat of catastrophic global climate change.  You can expect to see a lot of Roskam around the district during the labor day recess, talking up his plan. RSR has a sneak preview for you.  The 8 part Roskam plan is staggeringly simple:

  1. Ignore it. Pretend global climate change does not present any threat.
  2. Burn more fossil fuels faster. Try not to be outpaced by China and India.
  3. Cut taxes on big business.
  4. Say no to anything President Obama or any Democrat in Congress proposes.
  5. Get reelected.
  6. Continue blind obedience to masters at U.S. Chamber and National Association of Manufacturers.
  7. Cut taxes on big business.
  8. Call Nancy Pelosi a threat to national security.

Jumping creepers, Peter, why didn’t we think of this.

Seriously Peter, saying no to anything anybody propses to address the problem of global climate change is not a plan.  If we listen to you, we’re all screwed.  You who would put the narrow  interests  of your corporate campaign contributors ahead of saving the planet – for your children.

Cap & trade may not be perfect and it isn’t going to solve all of our problems, but it is a start, a step in the right direction.  It may very well be expensive for us all. But nobody said saving the planet was going to be cheap. Its just something we have to do.

If you don’t want to do cap & trade, then you tell us how you’re going to save the planet, not just how you are going to save your donors on their taxes.  Put up or shut up.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •