COMANCHE COUNTY DEMOCRAT

OKLAHOMA SENATE SEAT ANALYSIS

ARE YOU READY FOR SOME POLITIKING

Link: Daily Kos: Second Tier Senate Pickups in 2008: Oklahoma.

INHOFE PROTECTING YOUR PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFITS?

James Inhofe Parades his “Senior Advocacy” Award from Pharmaceutical Industry Front Group

Earlier this week, Jim Mountain Inhofe issued a press release praising himself for receiving the Guardian of Seniors’ Rights Award for “his continued support of seniors’ rights during the 109^th Congress.” The organization that presented Inhofe with this award, the 60 Plus Association, is described in the release as “a non-partisan seniors’ citizens association [that] advocates a prescription drug benefit for seniors as well as tax fairness, fiscal responsibility, and other current seniors citizen issues.”

ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN INHOFE?

Jim “ Iraq is nothing short of a miracle” Inhofe Could Take Over Armed Services Committee

There has been much speculation lately over which Senators would take over which committees when Congress convenes next session. Due to term limits, some senators are being forced to step down and others will rise to the helm. Interestingly enough, this could mean the end of Jim Inhofe’s reign as Environment and Public Works Committee chairman, but unfortunately could elevate him to the powerful position of Armed Services Committee chair. Yes, that’s right, the same man who called what’s happened in Iraq “nothing short of a miracle” would be in charge of all defense related issues.

According to a recent story in Roll Call, Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) will have to step down as Armed Services chairman due to Republican term limits. But, according to the article, “Warner may have the option to oust Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) from the chairmanship of the Environment and Public Works Committee, because Warner outranks him.”

Now, I know what you’re thinking…this calls for a celebration! But don’t whip out those party hats just yet. When Warner steps down, Sen. John McCain is expected to take over. But, McCain is largely expected to run for president in 2008, and many have questioned whether or not he can juggle such an important chairmanship while running for the highest government office in the country. So, another senator may have to take over for him. “And, eventually, if McCain remains a viable candidate in the presidential race, he could take a leave of absence from the chairmanship and choose an interim successor. One option may be Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., the third-most-senior Republican on the committee.” (Arizona Republic, 9/19/06)

That’s a little bit scary. Jim Inhofe doesn’t exactly have the sanest record when it comes to defense. Just for fun, let’s review:

Inhofe claims that what’s has happened in Iraq is “nothing short of a miracle”
Recently, Inhofe said that “what’s happened [in Iraq ] is nothing short of a miracle.” This has largely been contradicted by both newspapers and testimonials from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. This, even though Inhofe has been to Iraq 11 times. ( Tulsa World, 8/22/06)

Inhofe said “civil war is not going on” in Iraq.

Earlier this month, Inhofe gave a grossly inaccurate picture of the state of the Iraq war on the Senate floor. He argued that immense progress had been made, that violence was not, in fact, quickly escalating, and that Iraqis were actually quite happy about the American presence. “Civil war is not going on,” Inhofe insisted. (Congressional Record, 9/6/06) This in the face of a dismal Pentagon report that asserted, “Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq , specifically in and around Baghdad , and concern about civil war within the Iraqi civilian population has increased in recent months.” (Associated Press, 9/1/06)

Inhofe was more “outraged by the outrage” over the Abu Ghraib prison controversy than by the abuse itself.

During the hearings on the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in 2004, Inhofe created quite the stir when he said he was fed up with all the “humanitarian do- gooders” making such a fuss over the inhumane treatment of prisoners. ( Washington Post, 5/12/04) He said he was “more outraged by the outrage” than by the treatment of the prisoners. ( New York Times, 5/12/04)

Inhofe is displeased with the conditions at Guantanamo …because they’re too nice!

After visiting the compound at Guantanamo Bay , Inhofe said that the conditions were much better than the prisoners deserved. “We’re dealing with terrorists here,” he said. ( Wichita Eagle, 1/26/02)

Inhofe suggested that the 9-11 attacks were a form of divine retribution against America for failing to defend Israel

In a speech on the Senate floor in 2002, Inhofe explicitly suggested that the 9-11 attacks were a form of divine retribution against the US for failing to adequately defend Israel . “One of the reasons I believe the spiritual door was opened for an attack against the United States of America is that the policy of our Government has been to ask the Israelis, and demand it with pressure, not to retaliate in a significant way against the terrorist strikes that have been launched against them." He went on to cite the most important reason for defending Israel : “Because God said so.” (Congressional Record, 3/4/02)

Really? This is the guy they’re going to choose to serve as the chair of the Armed Services Committee? Be afraid, be very afraid.

Cross-posted at SenateMajority.com

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

JIM IN HOT WATER - Controversial Author Invited

It seems Jim Inhofe is up to old tricks in the Environment and Public Works Committee. Tomorrow, the committee Inhofe chairs will hold a hearing on the Asia-Pacific Partnership, a six country agreement to boost private investment in climate technologies. The partnership is designed to help member nations reach strategies for improving energy security, reducing pollution, and addressing climate change.

Inhofe has decided to invite as his star witness Bjorn Lomborg, controversial author and professor, best known for his book The Skeptical Environmentalist, which was widely criticized by environmental scientists. (Greenwire, 9/18/06) Looks like this could be a Michael Crichton repeat!

The Skeptical Environmentalist challenged the claims of the world’s environmentalists, characterizing them as grossly exaggerated. The book received much criticism from the scientific community. (Oregonian, 8/21/06) In fact, after a group of scientists brought formal complaints against the assertions made in the book, the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty, a body under Denmark ’s Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, found that the book was scientifically dishonest, citing among other things: fabrication of data, distorted interpretation of conclusions, plagiarism, and deliberate misinterpretation of others’ results. (BBC News, 12/22/03)

A number of science publications, including Scientific American, Grist, and Nature Magazine published extensive criticism of the book. The Nature critique argued, “the text employs the strategy of those, who, for example, argue that gay men aren’t dying of AIDS, that Jews weren’t singled out by the Nazis for extermination, and so on.” (Nature, 11/8/01)

In addition, the Union of Concerned Scientists strongly criticized the book, claiming it to be “seriously flawed and fail[ing] to meet basic standards of credible scientific analysis.”

It is no wonder that Jim Inhofe, renowned climate change skeptic, invited someone like Bjorn Lomborg to testify at a hearing concerning climate change and pollution reduction. After all, this is not the first time this has happened. In a 2005 Environment and Public Works Committee hearing on climate change, Inhofe called as his star witness author Michael Crichton, and tried to make his book, State of Fear, required reading for all senate members, arguing, “while ‘State of Fear’ is a novel, it is fiction, the footnotes are incontrovertibly scientific.” (Congressional Transcripts, 9/28/05)

In fact, the book had been largely dismissed by the scientific community and the science employed in the book was dismissed as distorting actual research. “The best face I can put on this is he doesn’t know what he’s doing. The worst is that he’s intentionally deceiving people as he accuses environmentalists (of doing) in ‘State of Fear ,’” said NYU physics professor Martin Hoffert. ( Saint Paul Pioneer Press, 1/28/05)

With Inhofe at the helm and skeptic Bjorn Lomborg the featured guest, this promises to be a circus hearing aimed largely at debunking the current science on climate change and global warming.

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

JIM IN HOT WATER - Crusade Against California Dropped

http://jiminhotwater.blogspot.com/2006/09/inhofe-drops-his-crusade-against.html

Inhofe Drops His Crusade Against California …For Now

Last week, Sen. Jim Inhofe announced that he had introduced an update to the Clean Air Act to “improve air quality for the dirtiest areas of the country.” The bill, entitled, the Clean Air Attainment Enforcement Act, was nothing more than a veiled attempt to get back at California for enacting an apparently offensive global warming legislation.
According to Inhofe’s press release, “This bill is a narrow amendment that targets only those areas of the country that are out of compliance with multiple pollutants and will not come into compliance by their attainment deadlines.” What the release doesn’t mention is that, according to the EPA’s ozone designations, the only areas affected by this legislation are the Los Angeles Basin and the San Joaquin Valley . This move came just a week after California enacted a ground breaking bill to cap emissions on manmade greenhouse gases, which Inhofe failed to hide his disdain for. As the Contra Costa Times notes, if Inhofe were anyone else, “he’d be on his dust farm throwing a tantrum.”

Apparently Inhofe realized he wasn’t fooling anyone, because, according to today’s Environment and Energy Daily, he has removed the bill from the committee’s markup agenda. Democrats objected to the bill and argued Inhofe “had not properly vetted the measure.” (Environment and Energy Daily, 9/12/06)

Perhaps Inhofe has dropped his retaliation war for now, but we’re assuming there’s much more to come from Senator Inhofe, (R-Exxon).

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

JIM IN HOT WATER - Disses ethanol

At a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing yesterday on the possible use of ethanol, Sen. Jim Inhofe made clear his refusal to invest in alternative fuel production.

“Corn cannot be the answer,” Inhofe said, suggesting that consumers would pay additional costs as a result of ethanol production. (Reuters, 9/7/06)

What is more telling is the amount of money Inhofe has received from the oil and gas industry since he has been in office; perhaps that is who he is protecting. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Inhofe has received nearly $900,000 from the industry since 1989. Seems it would be in his best monetary interest to hate the corn…

Yet even President Bush, arguably one of the largest receivers of oil money, has endorsed the use of ethanol as an alternative fuel source. In an energy speech last year, Bush said:

“We've got to be aggressive about finding alternative sources of fuel. And one such source is ethanol. Ethanol comes from corn -- and we're pretty good about growing corn here in America , we've got a lot of good corn growers. Therefore, it makes sense to promote ethanol as an alternative to foreign sources of oil. Ethanol can be mixed with gasoline to produce a clean, efficient fuel.”

Sick of paying record gas prices while the oil and gas companies reap the benefits? Then give old Inhofe a shout. I’m sure he’d love to hear from an angry constituent.

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

JIM IN HOT WATER - Iraq Distortions

Sen. James Inhofe from Oklahoma took to the Senate floor this evening to give a grossly inaccurate picture of the state of the Iraq war. Inhofe argued that immense progress has been made in Iraq , that violence was not, in fact, on the rise, and that Iraqis are quite happy about the American presence there. “Civil war is not going on,” said Inhofe. He could not have been more wrong.

On Friday, the Pentagon released a rather dismal report on the progress that has been made in Iraq . According to the Associated Press, Iraq is experiencing a rising tide of sectarian violence, and increasing security problems. From the report, “Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq , specifically in and around Baghdad , and concern about civil war within the Iraqi civilian population has increased in recent months.”

The report also detailed how optimism among Iraqi citizens has declined as well, contrary to what Inhofe said on the floor. When asked if things will be better in the future, the number of respondents answering positively has been steadily declining, according to polling in the report. (AP, 9/1/06) Doesn’t exactly sound like the pretty picture Inhofe painted.

Inhofe went on to say that the only reason the Democratic senators were expressing this criticism is because they are all running for president. In fact, only two senators even rumored to be running for president had spoken thus far, Senator Clinton and Senator Kerry. Others included Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Carl Levin, Edward Kennedy, Mark Dayton, Barbara Mikulski, Tom Harkin, and Frank Lautenberg. Inhofe must be reading some pretty strange newspapers if he thinks they’re all running for president…

At the end of his speech, Inhofe urged his colleagues to keep politics out of the debate:

“The greatest possible disservice we can do, not just to the Iraqi people, but to our troops over there, is to use Rumsfeld and the war politically, for advancement.”

This from a Republican? Maybe Inhofe should direct his comments elsewhere, like to those in his own party, as they have openly admitted that they will use the issues of national security to better their chances of winning in November.

Sadly, Inhofe’s mischaracterizations shouldn’t be all that surprising. After all, it is certainly not the first time this has happened. Remember that “nothing short of a miracle” comment?

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

JIM IN HOTWATER

http://jiminhotwater.blogspot.com/

Calling Michael Crichton…Jim Inhofe Stands Steadfast Against California’s Emissions Capping, Calls for More Hearings

Well it didn’t take long for global warming champ Jim Inhofe to come out against California’s landmark legislation to control greenhouse gases.  Yesterday’s Congressional Quarterly reports that Inhofe has labeled the bill a “job-killer” that would cost the state more than it’s worth.

“The impact of this ‘symbolic’ legislation is a steep price to pay for the thousands who will lose their jobs and for the disadvantaged communities which will suffer because of this bill.” (CQ Today, 8/31/06)

This statement couldn’t be farther from the truth.  The legislation, in fact, is anything but “symbolic.”  The new law is expected to cut carbon dioxide pollution by 25 percent by 2020, bringing the levels back down to what they were in 1990.  The bill is also expected to attract new and better technologies to the area.  " California is positioning itself to become the hub of a new clean energy economy based on solar energy, ethanol and other renewable fuels," says Bernadette del Chiaro of Environment California, a Sacramento-based group. "These will be the next Silicon Valley industries for California to export to the rest of the world." (Time, 8/31/06)    

In addition, the emissions legislation is expected to create new jobs in California , not cost them.  According to a recent study conducted by University of California , Berkeley economists, the law could boost the state’s economy by more than $60 billion and create as many as 89,000 new jobs by the year 2020.  Even the state’s largest electric utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, endorsed the law, saying that it "strikes the right balance between improving the environment and protecting the economy."

Other industry leaders have also increasingly come out in favor of greenhouse gas capping legislation.  A recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle had the head of the American Public Power Association acknowledging that inaction on global warming “is not a viable strategy.”  According to the story, several industry leaders, including Shell and Exelon have even testified in front of the Senate on their support for mandatory limits on carbon dioxide emissions.

Despite the emerging public and industry consensus on the dangers of ignoring catastrophic global warming, Jim Inhofe has refused to budge.  The newly enacted California legislation has led him to call for more hearings on climate change, according to the CQ article.  Remember, last time the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee held such a hearing, his star witness was novelist Michael Crichton, whose novel on the subject, State of Fear, has been widely dismissed by the nation’s leading climate scientists as misleading and distorting. ( Saint Paul Pioneer Press, 1/28/05)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein is expected to introduce her own national version of the California bill when the Senate returns from recess.  With the likes of James Inhofe at the helm of the Environment committee, don’t expect too much more progress on the issue.  As California has shown, it is up to states to take matters into their own hands. 

Tori Wender

Senate Majority Project

202-204-9054

twender@senatemajority.com

www.senatemajority.com

ENERGIZER BUNNY IN HOT WATER

http://jiminhotwater.blogspot.com/2006/08/jim-inhofes-back-to-school-lesson-dont.html

Click on this web address and it will take you to the article. Looks like good stuff. Will let you know when the next one is ready.

INHOF IN HOTWATER

http://jiminhotwater.blogspot.com/ 

The Cheese Stands Alone: Jim Inhofe's Donors Turn on Him; Oil Execs Agree to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

It’s a good day for believers of catastrophic global warming, or those with any logic whatsoever, and a bad day for Sen. Jim Inhofe…

After years of fighting off any and all efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions, energy companies are finally starting to come around, according to today’s San Francisco Chronicle. As the article notes, “with growing public anxiety about climate change, major corporations are increasingly preparing for – and, in some cases, lobbying for – Congress to regulate emissions of heat-trapping gases.”

"The scientific evidence is real," said Betsy Moler, vice president for government and environmental affairs at Exelon Corp. of Chicago , an energy firm that supports a mandatory cap on carbon dioxide emissions. "When you have the likes of Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska , a conservative Republican, and he says he has seen the changes in his lifetime in the Arctic , there is just no doubt that something has to happen."

This is a huge turn-around from an industry that traditionally supported the Bush administration and other allies (Jim Inhofe) in their staunch opposition to limits on carbon dioxide. You know it’s serious when the nation’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases join the effort to reduce their presence in the atmosphere.

The Boston Globe also noted this morning that “the movement to tackle climate change is finally growing large in this country, and at least part of it is beginning to get a little more outspoken.” And just a few days ago, as mentioned in the previous post, a new Zogby poll showed that nearly three out of four Americans are more convinced that global warming is in fact a reality than they were two years ago.

Yet, despite the overwhelming evidence that Americans want at least some progress on this issue, it has had no effect whatsoever on our favorite environment-hater Sen. James Inhofe. Yesterday, in a speech to Norman , OK businesses and government leaders, Inhofe hated on, well, everyone, but saved his best, as always, for global warming. Inhofe began with an assault on the Kyoto Treaty, a UN agreement that mandates cutbacks in emissions of greenhouse gases, arguing that it would lead to worldwide governance. He also added this gem: “Since 1999, science has refuted the concept” that greenhouse gases are causing global warming.

Really Senator? That’s probably why the leading industries that actually benefit from releasing these gases are agreeing to cap them, in an effort to reduce the effects of global warming. In fact, one of Inhofe’s top campaign contributors, BP, has been the industry leader in this effort, cutting its carbon emissions by 10 percent, according to the Chronicle article.

Will Inhofe call them Nazi propagandists too or is their money more important to him than that?