A Blog Called Hope

Despite Senator McCain’s recent efforts to paint himself as the energy-savvy candidate, a further look at his record exposes the truth of his environmental ineptitude

In recent weeks, Senator John McCain has shifted his campaign focus to energy; presumably a response to public concerns over rising gas prices and global warming.

One must agree that the Senator from Arizona has indeed put on a good show. Though, a series of entertaining rants is all Senator McCain has devolved into. He has thrown around a $300 million figure to possibly motivate inventors to help resolve our dependence on oil. He has discussed the development of nuclear energy facilities in Nevada (despite the fact 3/4 of Nevada voters oppose such a move).

The reality is that Senator McCain has repeatedly voted against legislation to create “green” jobs and in favor of increasing nuclear waste in the state of Nevada.

In 2002, John McCain voted to approve a site at Yucca Mountain as a repository for nuclear and radioactive waste. After the vote, McCain said that storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain would answer “one of the most important environmental, health and public safety issues for the American people.” In 2000, McCain voted to override the presidential veto of legislation that would establish a permanent nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. In 1997, McCain similarly voted to establish a repository at the Mountain. McCain voted yes on a similar bill in 1996. [2002 Senate Vote #167, 7/9/2002; The Arizona Republic, 7/10/2002; 2000 Senate Vote #88, 5/2/2000; 1998 Senate Vote #148, 6/2/1998; 1997 Senate Vote #42, 4/15/1997; 1996 Senate Vote #259, 7/31/1996; 1996 Senate Vote #256, 7/31/1996]

When coupled with the fact that Senator McCain has consistently voted against the creation of “green” jobs, it is easy to see the inherent contradiction of his policy on energy.

John McCain supported the filibuster of the 2007 energy bill that included an extension of the production tax credit to 2011. While McCain missed the vote to on the bill, according to his staff he did, in fact, support the continuing the filibuster, which eventually killed the bill. In its place, Congress passed another version of the legislation that did not include an extension of the tax credit. A 2008 economic study by Navigant Consulting found that “over 116,000 U.S. jobs and nearly $19 billion in U.S. investment could be lost in just one year if renewable energy tax credits are not renewed by Congress… The study concluded that over 76,000 jobs are put at risk in the wind industry, and approximately 40,000 jobs in the solar industry.” [HR 6, Vote 425, 12/13/07, Failed 59-40: R 9-39 D 48-1 I 2-0; Forbes, 12/13/07; U.S. News & World Report, 12/14/07; American Wind Energy Association and the Solar Energy Industries Association press release, 2/4/08]

For a man who claims he has taken up the cause of trying to find alternative energy resources in order to salvage Americans from swelling gas prices, it has become clear that McCain has been wholly inconsistent when it comes to energy. The only constant on energy when it comes to McCain is that he talks a good game to appease the American public but makes decisions behind closed doors that push us further from resolving the energy crisis.

Despite McCain throwing adviser under the bus, McCain himself has a history of using tragedy to further his campaign

In yesterday’s Fortune Magazine, John McCain’s chief strategist, Charlie Black, was quoted as saying that another terrorist attack on our country would “be a big advantage” to McCain’s campaign.

Today, McCain, sensing the overwhelming public outrage, sidestepped from the comments. When pressed about the outrageous assertions made by Black, McCain quickly asserted he knew nothing of them, “I cannot imagine why he would say it,” McCain proclaimed.

Maintaining the stance that he did not know of the remarks by Clark, McCain claimed that IF they had been made that he “strenuously disagreed” with Clark.

However, this is not the first time that McCain’s camp has used the fear produced by terrorist attacks as a launching pad for their campaign.

Back in January, soon after the horrific attack that killed Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan, Clark again saw the tragedy as a positive for McCain’s candidacy. Black observed that the assassination of Bhutto would put the American public back on notice and hone the focus in on McCain’s supposed strong point, the War on Terror.

It is unfortunate that McCain’s campaign continues to utilize terrorist tragedies for their own selfish political gain. To spin such an unspeakable act of savagery into a positive for your political aspirations is both insensitive and downright despicable.

There must come a time that either McCain disavows himself from Clark (which in and of itself assumes McCain truly disagrees with Clark’s ludicrous declarations), or the American people come to realize the truth that McCain’s campaign is solely based off of the same fear-mongering we have been subjected to for eight long years.

In interview with Matt Lauer, McCain proclaims bringing American troops home from Iraq is “not too important”

After several months of attacking Barack Obama for his ‘naiveté’ on Iraq, it seems McCain himself is the one of touch.

During an interview with Matt Lauer last week, John McCain was questioned about his stance on Iraq; particularly his position on a timetable for withdrawal. McCain took the opportunity to downplay the significance of the potential of our brave men and women returning home, and instead spewed more nonsensical foreign policy and took another jab at Senator Obama.

Here is a portion of Matt Lauer’s interview with the Republican Presidential candidate:

MR. LAUER: When the president, though, came up with this surge at a time where everyone, it seemed, was thinking the contrary, you endorsed it with great conviction and great courage. And a lot of people now say the surge is working.

SEN. MCCAIN: Anybody who knows the facts on the ground say that, yes.

MR. LAUER: If it’s working, Senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?

SEN. MCCAIN: No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine.
American casualties and the ability to withdraw — we will be able to withdraw. General Petraeus is going to tell us in July when he thinks we are.
But the key to it is we don’t want any more Americans in harm’s way. And that way they will be safe and serve our country and come home with honor and victory, not in defeat, which is what Senator Obama’s proposal would have done.

So what’s not important to John McCain is soldiers’ being safe and spending time with their families and loved ones. What IS important to McCain is “victory”, what IS important to McCain is pride. Is pride and “victory” worth the 120,000+ American lives that are on the line in?…

“I would rather be a one-term President and do what I believe is right than to be a two-term President at the cost of seeing America become a second-rate power and to see this Nation accept the first defeat in its proud 190-year history…Let us understand: North Vietnam cannot defeat or humiliate the United States. Only Americans can do that.” -President Richard Nixon, 1969.

Couple these insensitive and ill-informed assertions with those he recently made about Iran, it is becoming clear John McCain does not have a handle on his own cash cow, foreign policy.

John McCain is expected to call for more offshore drilling today. His campaign recently released an ad meant to champion him as a supporter of renewable energy. The same day that ad was released, McCain left for Texas to meet with his friends at Big Oil.

During his last run for the presidential nomination, McCain supported a moratorium on drilling. He will also reverse his stance on the need for a windfall profit tax for oil companies. Just six weeks ago McCain said he was open to a tax on excessive oil company profits; tonight, he will take the opposite position when he rejects the tax.

His new ad claims to eliminate the US’s dependence on foreign oil by supporting renewable energy although he has repeatedly voted against such green jobs and technologies.

Democratic National Committee Communications Director Karen Finney attacks McCain’s new ad as “universally misleading”:

“How can we trust John McCain to confront soaring gas prices or break America’s dependence on foreign oil when he caved in to Big Oil on drilling and tax breaks when of his top economic advisors helped create the problem in the first place, and he has repeatedly opposed incentives for green jobs and renewable energy?”

McCain has not voted to promote renewable energy
John McCain has repeatedly voted against efforts to promote renewable energy, as with his vote against an amendment mandating renewable energy sources to produce a minimum of 10 percent of the electricity sold by electric utilities by 2020. Many bills failed to pass by only a few votes.

In 2007 alone, McCain missed numerous votes on the passage of energy policy legislation, including a missed vote on a bill that would increase the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. Other missed votes included bills for tax credits for renewable energy production, for renewable energy R&D, and for energy related tax incentives worth $18 billion. [2007 Senate Vote #98, 3/22/2007; 2007 Senate Vote #223, 6/21/2007; 2007 Senate Vote #416, 12/7/2007; 2008 Senate Vote #8, 2/6/2008 2006 Senate Vote #42, 3/14/2006; 2005 Senate Vote #158, 6/28/2005; 2001 Senate Vote #125, 5/21/2001]

McCain blocked tax credits for green jobs
A 2008 economic study by Navigant Consulting found that “over 116,000 US jobs and nearly $19 billion in US investment could be lost in just one year if renewable energy tax credits are not renewed by Congress.” The study shows that over 76,000 jobs are put at risk in the wind industry and 40,000 more are put at risk in the solar industry.

The Enron Loophole
Years after the Enron scandal, the loophole that helped bring Enron to its demise still lives on. McCain Campaign Co-Chair Phil Gramm tucked the Commodities Future Modernization Act into a separate piece of legislation which would later be known as the Enron Loophold. Evidence shows that investors looking to make an easy gain are causing prices in oil to rise faster than ordinary market forces could. The loophole allows unregulated trading on energy futures markets where investors can essentially “bet” on oil prices at a given point in the future.

McCain violates agreement with FEC by unilaterally withdrawing from campaign spending program; DNC files official complaint

When the John McCain’s campaign commenced, he entered into an agreement with the FEC. That contract, now the focal point of the complaint filed by the Democratic National Committee, dictated limits on matching funds, campaign spending, and that the FEC must approve any withdrawal from the agreement.

However, John McCain unilaterally withdrew from the arrangement as questions emerged about a $4 million loan acquired by his campaign.

In response to McCain cavalier move, FEC Chairman David Mason sent a letter to the McCain campaign stating that he (McCain) cannot formally withdraw from the system until the FEC obtains more information regarding the terms of a $4 million loan his then cash-strapped campaign obtained last year as well as a formal vote from the commission.

Failing to honor his agreement with the FEC, or the parameters of campaign spending program, John McCain asserted that the letter from the FEC Chairman was, “Not a decision. It’s an opinion.”

Today, Howard Dean issued a statement as the Democratic National Committee formally filed a complaint with the FEC.

“The law is very clear. He can not withdraw if he has used the promise of matching funds as collateral for his loan. John McCain cannot unilaterally withdrawal from the spending limitations.” -Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean.

For more on this, visit the Democratic Party, MSNBC, and the Wall Street Journal.

After some public delays by John McCain, it seems that McCain will go ahead and fund raise with a Texas oilman who cracked jokes about rape

Williams Made Misogynist Remarks. “Clayton Williams, who ran unsuccessfully against the late Texas Gov. Ann Richards (D), sparked controversy nearly two decades ago when he joked women should give in while being raped. ‘As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it,’ the oilman remarked at the time.” [Washington Post, 6/13/08]

Main Point: John McCain’s claim that he is running a different kind of campaign rings hollow. His refusal to denounce or return the money raised by Clayton Williams, a supporter who has made misogynist and offensive comments in the past, shows McCain has no intention of running a different kind of campaign. Instead the McCain campaign has scheduled an additional fundraiser with Williams.

• Not only has the McCain campaign refused to return the money raised by Williams or denounce his outrageous remarks, but now the campaign is rescheduling the fundraiser for later next month.

• Instead of benefiting from two fundraisers involving Clayton Williams, Senator McCain should make it clear he will not tolerate this kind of sexism and inappropriate language in public life.

• McCain’s effort to mislead the voters into thinking Monday’s fundraiser had been canceled is truly outrageous and shows Senator McCain is not offering the ’straight talk’ he promised the American people. Instead of running a transparent campaign McCain has no problem deceiving the American people to benefit his own political career.

KEY FACTS:

McCain Campaign To Hold Fundraiser Later This Summer. “Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) has decided to hold a fundraiser initially sponsored by a controversial Texas oilman later in the summer at a different venue, according to an aide who asked not to be identified.This morning, a McCain aide confirmed in an e-mail that the contributors who had already made a combined donation of at least $300,000 to the event would have another chance to meet McCain.” [Washington Post, 6/15/08]

McCain Campaign Postpones Fundraiser. “Late Saturday afternoon, a McCain aide confirmed to the Chronicle that the Midland event had been postponed but had not been taken off the calendar. The compromise allowed McCain to say he had not held a fundraiser at Williams’ house; it gave Williams an opportunity to say that the event he organized had not been canceled.” [Houston Chronicle, 6/14/08]

McCain’s Tax Plan? Fiscally Irresponsible

Exhibit A of the poison pill in action is the sad case of John McCain, part of whose lingering image as a maverick rests on his early opposition to the Bush tax cuts, which he declared excessive and too tilted toward the rich.

Since then the budget surpluses of the Clinton years have given way to persistent deficits, and income inequality has risen to new heights, vindicating his opposition.

But instead of pointing this out, Mr. McCain now promises to make those tax cuts permanent – and proposes further cuts that are, if anything, tilted even more toward the wealthy. And how is the loss of revenue to be made up? Mr. McCain hasn’t offered a realistic answer. (New York Times)

Not The Man He Used To Be. . .McCain 2.0 Has Abandoned His Former Self

But that term didn’t even make the list this year when voters were asked by the Pew Research Center to sum up McCain in a single word. “Old” got the most mentions, followed by “honest,” “experienced,” “patriot,” “conservative” and a dozen more. The words “independent,” “change” or “reformer” weren’t among them.

Voters have notoriously short memories, but it could be argued that McCain cheapened his own brand.

He embraced President Bush and attempted to become, like Bush, the choice of the Republican establishment. In the process, he helped obliterate recollections of his first run for president, when he became the first Republican in a long time with strong crossover appeal to independents and Democrats.

Losing his reputation for independence could prove particularly costly this year. (Baltimore Sun)

Revelation About McCain Fundraiser Unlikely To Win Over Any Women

Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign canceled a fund-raiser at the home of an 86-year-old oilman, Clayton Williams, after the campaign faced questions about comments Mr. Williams made in the 1990 race for Texas governor.

At the time, Mr. Williams, a Republican who was running against Ann Richards, made a joke about rape and said he would campaign against Ms. Richards, a Democrat, as he would deal with a cow on his ranch: “head
her and hoof her and drag her through the dirt.” He later apologized for the remarks.

The campaign canceled the fund-raiser on Friday after it faced questions from ABC News and The Washington Post. (New York Times)

McCain’s Vision For The Supreme Court Would Turn Country’s Clock Backward

Want to overturn Roe v. Wade and begin a new political civil war over abortion? How about a Supreme Court that supports the George Bush approach of executive power similar to royal monarchs, with massive and
illegal wiretapping thrown in, legalized by a McCain court?

The Supreme Court is not only one branch of government, it is the branch that determines the powers of the other two branches. In the world of George Bush and John McCain, the executive branch is all-powerful with no meaningful checks and balances.

With a Supreme Court that would fully support this radical and extreme notion of unlimited, pre-emptive executive power, the sins of George Bush are only the beginning of what a McCain court would make the law of the land.

Bush and McCain almost always agree on the need for a super secret superstate, justified by the politics of fear, employing tactics such as massive eavesdropping in violation of clear constitutional language and clear federal law.

Bush and McCain almost always agree in opposition to legal protections for women and labor. In their economic and legal philosophy, Bush and McCain always agree on a Darwinian laissez-faire where the big boys rule, the average folks are unprotected, the powerful monopolize their power and the powerless become second-class citizens with third-class legal rights.

The list goes on. Even on torture, McCain’s latest position is torture-friendly. Even on Guantanamo, which McCain says he will close, his legal position is anti-constitutional. His verbal position depends on his need for extreme right-wing support and his level of political desperation at the time he speaks, on a given day. (The Hill’s Pundits Blog)

Obama and DNC announce that they will no longer accept Washington lobbyist donations

With just under five months remaining until election day, and as the race between Senator Obama and Senator McCain begins to heat up, the DNC has followed Senator Obama’s lead and will no longer accept Washington lobbyist donations.

“We will not take a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACS – we’re going to change how Washington works. They will not fund my party, they will not run our White House, and they will not drown out the voice of the American people when I am president of the United States of America,” Senator Barack Obama. [ABC News]

“Our presumptive nominee has pledged not to take donations from Washington lobbyists and from today going forward the DNC makes that pledge as well. The American people’s priorities will set the agenda in an Obama Administration, not the special interests.” -DNC Chairman Howard Dean [Boston Globe]

Preliminary electoral projections show a potential neck and neck race between Senators Obama and McCain, but Gallup poll tells another story

Today, CNN released their Electoral Projections for the upcoming November election. These projections are based off of “a number of factors: polling, state voting trends and more”.

In what CNN deems “safe” states (nearly certain to vote for that candidate), Barack Obama leads with 153 electors compared to 125 for McCain. Safe states for Senator Obama include the likes of Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and California. Texas, Arizona, and Mississippi are three states considered “safe” for McCain.

On the other hand, McCain has more states that CNN believes are “leaning” (showing present tendencies to vote for) McCain. The 69 electors “leaning” for McCain include states like Louisiana and Indiana. At this time, Senator Obama has Maine, New Jersey, Oregon, and Washington “leaning” his way; accounting for 37 electors.

As expected, this election will once again hinge on the “swing states” (Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, etc.) that CNN currently deems a “toss up”. These 12 states account for 154 electoral votes; representing 29% of the total electoral count.

Meanwhile, the most recent Gallup poll shows that Barack Obama currently holds a 6% (48% to 42%) lead over his Republican counterpart. This figure is actually up one percentage point from when Senator Obama effectively claimed the Democratic Party nomination. The 6 percentage point gap is also an encouraging number because this represents Senator Obama’s largest advantage since he and McCain have been polled against one another.

These figures, specifically CNN’s electoral projections, exhibit the close race that faces this country. It will be immensely important for Rhode Islanders to sure up support for Senator Obama within the state as well as elsewhere. Rhode Islanders who support Barack Obama have the ability to reach out to other states, such as New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, to help Senator Obama capture the 270 electoral votes necessary to claim the Presidency and to spur the change our country needs.

For more Election coverage and a map displaying the Electoral Projections visit CNN.com.

1. Why does John McCain continue to claim he opposed President Bush’s strategy in Iraq when the record clearly shows him echoing the Bush Administration’s misleading talking points at every turn and he himself told a conservative talk radio host in March that “no one has supported President Bush on Iraq more than” he has?

2. Why does John McCain expect voters to believe he would bring change to Washington when he voted with President Bush 95 percent of the time and is promising more of President Bush’s policies on the economy, health care, and foreign policy?

3. How does John McCain expect to win in November when he can’t even shore up his own base, polls consistently show he is on the wrong side of the key issues, and his campaign staff is in disarray?

BONUS QUESTION: If John McCain expects voters to believe he would have responded differently to Hurricane Katrina, why did he side with President Bush in opposing the creation of a commission to find out what went wrong? Why did he vote against funding for Katrina relief and recovery efforts?

McCain: “No One Has Supported President Bush on Iraq More Than I Have.” During an March 2008 interview on The Mike Gallagher Show, McCain stated, “no one has supported President Bush on Iraq more than I have.” [Think Progress blog, 4/2/08]

McCain voted with President Bush 95 percent of the time in 2007. According to Congressional Quarterly, He also has a record of heartily supporting Bush on some of his most controversial priorities, including the Iraq war and comprehensive immigration reform. In 2007, as he ramped up for his second White House run, McCain voted with Bush 95 percent of the time, according to Congressional Quarterly, which tallied votes McCain was present for on issues in which the administration took a position.” [Arizona Republic, 4/6/08] McCain had the highest rate of support in the entire U.S. Senate. [Congressional Quarterly, 1/13/2008]

McCain Voted for 4 of 5 Bush Budgets Adding to $9.8 Trillion in Spending. McCain supported four of the five Bush budgets that the Senate voted on from 2001-2006.

2001: H. Con. Res. 83: $1.95 Trillion [2001 Senate Vote #98]

2002: McCain Voted to Table [2002 Senate Vote #134]

2003: McCain Voted No [H.Con.Res. 95; 2003 Senate Vote #134]

2004: S. Con. Res 95: $2.45 Trillion [2004 Senate Vote #58]

2005: H.Con.Res. 95: $2.6 Trillion [2005 Senate Vote #114]

2006: S.Con.Res. 83: $2.8 Trillion [2006 Senate Vote #74]

McCain Voted Against Appropriating $109 Billion In Supplemental Emergency Funding, Including $28 Billion for Hurricane Relief. McCain voted against passage of the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations of 2006. Passage of the emergency supplemental bill would appropriate roughly $109 billion in emergency supplemental funding for fiscal 2006. It would provide $72.4 billion in fiscal 2006 funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and foreign aid, not counting an almost 3 percent across-the-board cut to defense funds in the bill. It would provide more than $28 billion for hurricane relief, approximately $2.3 billion for pandemic flu preparations and $1.9 billion for border security efforts. [2006 Senate Vote #112, 5/4/2006]

McCain Voted Against Granting Access To Medicaid For Hurricane Katrina Victims For Up To Five Months. McCain voted against an amendment to provide emergency health care and other relief for survivors of Hurricane Katrina. The amendment would grant access to Medicaid to Hurricane Katrina victims for up to five months; it also provided full federal funding for Medicaid in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama for up to one year; provide $800 million to compensate providers caring for Katrina evacuees; it temporarily suspended the Medicare Part B late enrollment penalty; and permit states hit by or serving evacuees to access the TANF Contingency Fund. It would be offset with funds unspent by the FEMA. [2005 Senate Vote #285, 11/3/2005]

McCain Voted Twice Against Establishing A Commission To Study The Response To Hurricane Katrina. McCain voted against amendments establishing a Congressional commission to examine Federal, State, and local response to devastation wrought by Hurricane Katrina in U.S. Gulf Region, especially in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and other areas impacted in the aftermath; and makes immediate corrective measures to improve future responses. [2006 Senate Vote #6, 2/2/2006; 2005 Senate Vote #229, 9/14/2005]