Skip to comments.CAP N TRADE - CALL NOW! these Republicans have until July 2, 2009 to change their vote...
Posted on 06/30/2009 4:41:48 AM PDT by blueyon
Please send this out ... these Republicans have until July 2, 2009 to change their vote...please ask everyone to contact them:
Republicans who voted for Cap-and-Trade (HR 2454)
Mary Bono Mack R (CA)
Palm Springs Office
707 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 9 Palm Springs, California 92262 Phone: (760) 320-1076
Mike Castle R (DW)
201 North Walnut Street, Suite 107 Wilmington, Delaware 19801-3970 Phone: (302) 428-1902
Mark Steven Kirk R (IL)
707 Stokie Boulevard, Suite 350 Northbrook, Illinois 60062 Phone: (847) 940-0202 Fax: (847) 940-7143
Leonard Lance R (NJ)
425 North Avenue East Westfield, New Jersey 07090 Phone: (908) 518-7733
Frank LoBiondo R (NJ)
5914 Main Street Mays Landing, New Jersey 08330 Phone: (609) 625-5008
John McHugh R (NY)
120 Washington Street, Suite 200 Watertown, New York 13601-3370 Phone: (315) 782-3150
Dave Reichert R (WA)
2737 78th Avenue, SE, Suite 202 Mercer Island, Washington 98040 Phone: (206) 275-3438
Chris Smith R (NJ)
1540 Kuser Road, Suite A9 Hamilton, New Jersey 08619 Phone: (609) 585-7878
I will try to find more contact info on each in a little while. If you have contract info please post it. Thanks for all your FREEPER help and for all of us coming together on this issue.
I called Smith's office yesterday - he is out of the country (Bosnia) for the next week - how convenient!
“these Republicans have until July 2, 2009 to change their vote”
Explanation please. How do you re-cast a vote?
Try e-mails. The calls go to a machine that says it is full, at least with Mark Kirk.
I’m shocked that Chris Smith voted for this boondoggle.
In addition to calling all eight yesterday I also contacted John Boehner’s office to ask if he was trying to convince them to change their minds. An aide insisted the motion to reconsider was a mere formality and the votes could not be changed. She stated the motion to reconsider referred to an alternative Republican bill. She asked me if I ever watch CSPAN in order to make a weak attempt to explain the motion to reconsider is a standard procedure that occurs for many bills.
Sorry,Its a waste of time.The lobbyist have them all sewn up and the hell with what the voters want.The battle is now with the senate.Hopefully enough people will start paying attention to the screwing that is coming.
See man50D comment above regarding change of vote..
CONTACT INFORMATION FOR SENATE
WRITE EARLY! CALL OFTEN!
Carbon Cap & Scam Ping - (POGW)
bump for later
What makes any of think they are going to listen this time, when they have proven time and again,,,they don’t care what you think!!!
From: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Correspondence From Senator Lieberman To: Date: Monday, June 29, 2009, 12:46 PM June 29, 2009 Dear Mr. Thank you for writing to me regarding your opposition to climate change legislation. I respectfully disagree with your position and view climate change as the most important environmental challenge of our time. Climate change is a very serious problem - not just for our environment, but for our economy and our national security, as well - and the way we produce and consume energy is making the problem worse. We need to pass legislation to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a clean energy economy. To do that, we will have to build a broad coalition. To succeed, a bill will need diverse support, which means bringing everyone to the table and really listening to what they have to say. We have to sit down with the environmental community, the business community, and the scientific community. We have to talk to Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle about how best to address this crucial issue. This could be a watershed moment. We have near scientific unanimity that humans are causing climate change, we have a Congress poised to take action, and we have a President pushing for progress. In his inaugural address, President Obama told us “each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.” He is absolutely right, and I look forward to working with the President to: (1) promote energy innovation so that we can produce and consume energy more cleanly and efficiently; (2) protect energy consumers from rising power prices; (3) prepare our communities to respond to the impacts of climate change; and (4) create jobs as we transition toward a clean energy economy. I also support including provisions in climate change legislation that would ensure a cap-and-trade system does not increase the deficit. Climate legislation should improve our environment and grow our economy at the same time. In these tough financial times, some have asked whether it makes sense to focus on the environment. The fact is, ignoring climate change until our economic situation improves will ultimately be far more expensive - and destructive - than taking steps to address it now. Climate change does not just threaten our environment, it endangers our economy and national security, as well. Left unabated, its impacts will ravage coastlines and coastal communities, destroy large swaths of roadways and railways, and seriously degrade land resources and biodiversity. Additionally, climate-induced droughts will cause famine, threatening already scarce resources and further destabilizing developing nations that are unable to quickly adapt. Every day we fail to reform our energy habits, we guarantee the solution will be far more expensive; and if we wait much longer, there may be no solution. If we are able to pass climate change legislation this year, we will ensure the integrity of our environmental legacy for generations to come. I am working hard to make certain we move toward that important goal. As you may know, on April 17, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a preliminary finding that carbon dioxide emissions harm human health and welfare. Though the finding has not yet been finalized, if and when it is, EPA will be able to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. One option the agency will have for doing so will be to set reduction targets. I believe strongly that cap-and-trade would be the better approach. It allows businesses to comply with reduction targets in the most economically efficient way possible, which, in turn, helps keep American-made goods competitive and keeps energy prices down. Thank you again for sharing your views and concerns with me. I hope you will continue to visit my website at http://lieberman.senate.gov for updated news about my work on behalf of Connecticut and the nation. Please contact me if you have any additional questions or comments about our work in Congress. Sincerely, Joseph I. Lieberman UNITED STATES SENATOR
..and this, Is the "result" of the NEA (union trugs) running the Government Schools.
"We don't need no STINKIN science....engrish classes"
Science, relies on "the scientific method (repeatable results)"...not "fashionable" (partisan) political consensus.
MOTION TO RECONSIDER
Typically, however, after announcing the result of a vote, the Speaker states that,
"without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table." This uses up
the one opportunity to reconsider, and makes the result of the vote final.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 219 - 212 (Roll no. 477).
"Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection."
In the words of Tony Soprano (fgedaboudit). The only vote that counts is Nov.’10, at which time these spineless gutless Rino hacks must be thrown out of office.
The deepest depths of hell are reserved for traitors.
Call these scum bags and remind them of that!
Do you realize how much more destruction can be accomplished by these thugs in another 5 months??? There will be no real vote against any of them. He’ll have an election Czar long before then. The only time for America to Act is RIGHT NOW!! oR FORGETABOUTIT!! CO
There is no such thing as five days to change their vote. A motion to reconsider has to be filed by the winning side, and the motion is good for one day only.
This vote stands.
Today, I attended a health care “listening session” given by Mike Castle, one of the eight GOP-ers that voted for this bill.
I couldn’t believe it—the entire crowd gave him an earful for an hour and a half, with not one person in favor of cap n trade. He even admitted that he received more calls opposed than in favor, which pretty much enraged the audience.
But he is a true believer in global warming.
I heard from someone who attended a similar session he had held yesterday mid state, that he received the same type of reception yesterday.
Where I live in Delaware ins in the GOP, conservative southern part of the state. The northern part is mpre populous and Dem.
It felt good to know that so many people were against him, against cap n trade and against government healthcare.
There’s still hope for this country.
As a “public service”. please ask your “true believer” congressman to post here on FR the reasons that he believes “global warming” is a clear and present danger to mankind. FACTS, please.
He was asked that. A small group of us confronted him nicely after the Town Hall type meeting to talk Cap n Trade.
We told him global warming was a hoax, and thousands of scientists don’t support it because it is unscientific. I told him point blank CO2 was NOT a pollutant.Another mentioned the EPA report that agreed that the science was faulty, and Castle said he was familiar with that.
He said he has done his own research and believes carbon is a pollutant and we need to move from carbon based fuels to non carbon fuels. The only thing we agreed with on is that he said he supports nuclear energy.
People this faternoon called into our local four hour conservative talk show host about this meeting today, and people were furious with Castle.
He stepped in it big time, and he now knows it.
Castle is a former governor of Delaware, and very well known and liked. He is a moderate Republican(RINO) but an earnest fellow.
But many people today are ready to retire him.
OK, Castle says he has “done his own research”. He should be asked to share this “research” with the people who elected him. They have a RIGHT to know.
If he can’t or won’t produce the FACTS behind his decision, the good people of his district should start mailing him a Notice of Termination, effective November 2010.