http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071203/pl_nm/energy_usa_congress_dc
give me your take on the situation.
2007-12-03 11:57:17 · 15 answers · asked by Bud W 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
This is Bush attempt to remain relevant before he makes his final bow as President. He is trying to get a bill pass for another open ended check for Iraq, as well as, keeping his tax breaks active. The Democratic Congress have said that the only bill they will pass for Iraq requires a deadline and that they are working on several tax resolution for the upcoming AMT that will affect millions of middle class people, however they all call for Bush's tax cuts to be repealed due to the amount of money that would be lost from the AMT.
Simply, this is politics. Bush and the Republicans want to stall any and all efforts by anyone to accomplish anything unless it is them.
2007-12-03 12:24:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
From the look of it what the President is objecting to is the higher taxes. You know full well that those taxes will not be paid by the oil companies, but will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices at the pump. Do you actually think that will be "good for America". What I see is yet another increase on the middle class and working poor. I thourght the Dems support the little people, why inflict yet another tax increase on us?
2007-12-03 13:39:16 · answer #2 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How much are you willing to pay for the improvement.? Lighter car get better mileage, but for the occupant in it is less safe & the car is more likely to be totalled at a lower speed. Yes, it is quite likely since they aren't attempting to change the economics of Renewable Energy nor willing to go nuclear, by 2050 we are likely to have the economy of 1850.
Granted the nutty Senator Feinstein has been very busy patting herself on the back for mandating 20% of grid power come from Renewable Sources by 2020. She in no way referenced the economics. She is patting herself on the back for mandating your power bill to go up. Neither side of the aisle will even hear that we have to think outside the box to change the economics.
Even environmentalist acknowledge deep in their lititure that ALL Capital expences have to be deleted to get their numbers that says solar is 2 to 4 times as expensive as grid power. If a utility was going to install such a power plant those cost would have to be covered.
Stop & think what I've said. By the way I'm still for Renewables & acknowledge they have to happen, but since I'm a nobody they don't listen. If you wish to look at other items I've written you are more than welcome to check out both my previous answers & my 360 page.
2007-12-03 12:26:41 · answer #3 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He obviously doesn't agree that this bill Would be good for America.
According to the article, the Democrats tacked a substantial tax increase for oil and gas companies onto the bill. Gasoline is $3.00 a gallon right now. Add a bunch more taxes and who knows how high the prices would go. These companies would simply pass their tax burden onto the consumers, and it would be poor and working folk who would suffer the most.
Nothing in the article suggests the President opposes the higher fuel efficiency standards.
Does this sound like it would be good for Americans?
2007-12-03 12:07:40 · answer #4 · answered by chocolahoma 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
As usual, politicians take something that could be useful (fuel efficiency and renewable energy), tack several stupid stipulations to it (taxes and unreasonable penalties), then hope the general public doesn't notice the stipulations and that the opposite party favors the main portion of the bill enough to deal with the stipulations. This time, the democrats simply went too far.
2007-12-03 12:19:19 · answer #5 · answered by rath 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Wow, have any of you actually read the bill?
Better fuel efficiency is good for America, however the bill doesn't stop there and would provide for stiff penalties by 2020 for most Midwest producers of energy. This is, by the way where most of our energy comes from.
So, while the bill is good if it only included language to increase fuel efficiency, it looses something when congress tries to penalize the majority of the energy producers. So in actuality the bill is NOT good for American in the long run because those penalties will be passed to who??? The consumer.
How is it that liberals can not see past their nose?
2007-12-03 12:09:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
Because its NOT GOOD for America. We as Americans will buy the cars that it makes sense to buy. If gas is to expensive we will be the cars that get good gas mileage. etc...
There is nothing good when governments tell businesses how they should run or what type of products they should make!!
Hell why doesn't the government just make all the cars ..
2007-12-03 12:07:22 · answer #7 · answered by TyranusXX 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because he can... he likes to feel like a big shot when he vetoes something...just a little games he likes to play.
2007-12-03 13:16:19 · answer #8 · answered by Debra H 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
It's just another example of big business owning the puppet in the White House.
I mean, how DARE we want more efficient vehicles like most of the World already has!!!!!
2007-12-03 12:00:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋
I read your link and it pretty much explained it as clear as it can be explained. What part of it did you not understand?
2007-12-03 12:10:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋