Change: Three Blue Dogs now support GOP measure to block EPA from regulating carbon dioxide

posted at 8:39 pm on January 21, 2010 by Allahpundit

What can Brown do for you? This, for starters.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska is leading the charge to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gasses, and today she got some support from across the aisle: Three Democratic senators signed onto Murkowski resolution to bar such regulation.

The Democrats, the Associated Press reports, are Ben Nelson of Nebraska, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas. Murkowski’s resolution says a rule submitted by the EPA to regulate greenhouse gasses “shall have no force or effect.” Thirty-five Republicans co-sponsored the measure.

Nelson and Lincoln also voted for John Thune’s failed amendment to end TARP, which would have made this a good day for Bribetaking Ben if not for the news from CBO that applying his Medicaid “Cornhusker Kickback” to all 50 states — as he claims he wants — would mean another $35 billion for ObamaCare. Not over 10 years, mind you; over just three years.

I’m trying to do the math for ObamaCare to see if I can get 11 Democratic no votes, which would kill the bill even in a case of reconciliation, but I don’t think I can get there. Best bets are these three plus Bayh, Bennet, Lieberman, McCaskill, Bill Nelson, Pryor, Warner, and Webb, but Bennet said a few months ago that he’d vote for O-Care even if it meant being voted out in November and McCaskill and Nelson, while swing-staters, have been safe yes votes until now. I don’t think we’ve got the numbers. Tell me I’m wrong.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

My Rep at a town hall meeting couldn’t seemly quite grasp the fact that the SCOTUS ruling on giving the EPA control over CO2 had to do with the structure of the law passed by congress and that congress could CHANGE the law. When a Rep who is a lawyer can’t grasp the obvious solution, then I know what his position is. Also this guy doesn’t believe that he should be concerned with the constitutionality of a vote; that is the court’s jurisdiction. With that attitude, he is gone if I can do anything about it come November regardless of any other factor. I guess he doesn’t understand the meaning of his oath either!

amr on January 22, 2010 at 7:50 AM

The toxic three are trying to redeem their reputations by attacking the EPA and CO2 regulation.

It would be funny if the situation wasn’t so severe.

MarkTheGreat on January 22, 2010 at 8:14 AM

Tell me I’m wrong.

You are wrong…
Often it is not the specific votes cast, it is the aura of the party casting the votes.
So even if they have enough, will that enough want to taint their party even more as one who is not listening?
I say they debate it in the open (for once) and measure the mood of the voters. We show them anger, and others will back off. They are identified as a “pack” of conniving politicians, and we need to keep them as that pack. This isn’t “three do-gooders”, this is three from a wild pack of thieving coyotes.
They are beginning to act like whipped dogs, a few come in with their tail between their legs, the rest continue to growl and show their teeth….a couple of more beatings and they will be on their backs begging for a treat.

right2bright on January 22, 2010 at 8:16 AM

Remember what they have to strip out of the bill in order to go the reconcilliation route. All that’s left will be tax increases and medicare cuts. That won’t get anyone’s support.

MarkTheGreat on January 22, 2010 at 8:16 AM

For those who are wondering about the how:

H/T Watts Up With That?
Murkowski tries anew to block EPA regulators

The Alaska Republican announced she would seek to keep the EPA from drawing up rules on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, refineries, manufacturers and other large emitters. Murkowski did it by filing a “disapproval resolution,” a rarely used procedural move that prohibits rules written by executive branch agencies from taking effect.

My emphasis.

LarryD on January 22, 2010 at 9:05 AM

Amazing! Three democrats who are on the chopping block to lose their jobs come November. How utterly self-serving is this?

kens on January 22, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Go Murkowski! As for the “other three”, you can’t redeem yourselves.

elclynn on January 22, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Amazing! Three democrats who are on the chopping block to lose their jobs come November. How utterly self-serving is this?

kens on January 22, 2010 at 10:01 AM

Sadly, Mary’s term is not up until 2014. And according to constitutional law opinions in Louisiana, you can only impeach a federally elected official, no recall.

barnone on January 22, 2010 at 11:03 AM

The EPA’s authority to enforce regulations needs to be severely curtailed. They could still provide a valuable service as a watchdog group. But the number of hoops they make businesses jump through is hurting business. That’s why we aren’t getting new refineries built, even though eveyrone agrees we could use them. And those new refineries would be safer and cleaner.

The EPA should have no ability to regulate CO2, though. And Congress could easily say that naturally-occuring gasses that are beneficial to plant and animal life fall outside the EPAs purview.

hawksruleva on January 22, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Nice try, but no cigar.

Sorry, I don’t buy the Blue Dog Democrat label for Nelson, Landrieu, and Lincoln.

Sir Napsalot on January 22, 2010 at 11:23 AM

Tell me I’m wrong

As it stands, sorry to say I think you are correct.

But I have been having this daydream that some of the “safe” dems may actually wake up to the will of the people. The polls are still showing declines in support for BambiCare, and I’m pretty sure there is at least some of the Dems now thinking they were duped into thinking that those townhall protesters were just a few deranged right wing nutjobs. Mass. proved there are a LOT of deranged right wing nutjobs around, (a lot of us just didnt realize we were nuts) Anyway, you can’t take away a man’s dreams.

JusDreamin on January 22, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 2