Senate Climate Change Bill Seeks To Expand Burden Of Government Control
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
In the race to do more, the U.S. Senate proposal for imposing government controls on emission of carbon-based energy is being heralded as being ahead of the legislation passed by the U.S. House. As we see from the Washington Post account, there is even a government pay-back scheme to portend of fiscal responsibility by reducing the deficit.
We still don’t know whether the measure will be processed and find its way through the U.S. Senate before calendar year 2009 transpires, but the real accomplishment that we believe would be the best involves a majority of members of the Senate voting “No” for passage. Although we don’t need the legislation or the additional energy costs forced by government mandate into the mixture, the mind-set that greater government control, in all areas, seems to be the priority of the majority party in charge of Congress.
In a recent conversation, I was reminded that elections have consequences and that those who elected the majority party to be in charge of the legislative process have expectations that they should ram-and-jam their visions into place. For my part, I hope that citizens come to recognize that the best way to address a government which refuses to limit its excess is by rejecting those in office who “represent” us by voting in support of such mandates. Election of those who have values, committed to limited government, are the consequences we need to benefit from after November of 2010.
In the race to do more, the U.S. Senate proposal for imposing government controls on emission of carbon-based energy is being heralded as being ahead of the legislation passed by the U.S. House. As we see from the Washington Post account, there is even a government pay-back scheme to portend of fiscal responsibility by reducing the deficit.
We still don’t know whether the measure will be processed and find its way through the U.S. Senate before calendar year 2009 transpires, but the real accomplishment that we believe would be the best involves a majority of members of the Senate voting “No” for passage. Although we don’t need the legislation or the additional energy costs forced by government mandate into the mixture, the mind-set that greater government control, in all areas, seems to be the priority of the majority party in charge of Congress.
In a recent conversation, I was reminded that elections have consequences and that those who elected the majority party to be in charge of the legislative process have expectations that they should ram-and-jam their visions into place. For my part, I hope that citizens come to recognize that the best way to address a government which refuses to limit its excess is by rejecting those in office who “represent” us by voting in support of such mandates. Election of those who have values, committed to limited government, are the consequences we need to benefit from after November of 2010.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 10/25/2009 5:45 AM 
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: U.S. Senate Global Warming Boxer-Kerry Climate Bill
Categories: Climate Change
Tags: U.S. Senate Global Warming Boxer-Kerry Climate Bill
Comments